4 ms·

Considering how big the EU market is I'm sure the profit Google derives from it is many times this judgement.

by Inconel 9y ago

jlebrech 9y ago
so EU can keep knocking on their door because google has no choice but to pay up?
- calcifer 9y ago
  Why shouldn't the EU keep knocking on Google's door if it keeps violating the law? Especially a law that protects the livelihoods of EU citizens.
- matthewmacleod 9y ago
  Well, they could consider not engaging in uncompetitive practices. The thing is, if they want to do business in the EU they have to abide by the rules of the EU. It's not that complex!
  - xorium 9y ago
    It's not that complex! Corporate law is extremely complex.
    - matthewmacleod 9y ago
      That's a glib answer. Google is free to continue doing business in the EU and is does not 'have no choice but to pay up'. That's simple.
      - jlebrech 9y ago
        I think the more "complex" the EU tries to make it in order to extract money from big corps the harder it can also be for smaller firms if those rules apply to those also.
        matthewmacleod 9y ago
        I see no evidence that the EU is legislating in order to extract money from corporations, so the very basis of your idea is flawed.
        tripzilch 9y ago
        But this ruling is specifically about companies with market dominance, so it does very much not apply to smaller firms.
    - tripzilch 9y ago
      It seemed pretty clear-cut to me, from the well-written article :)
  - Pyxl101 9y ago
    You're acting like the outcome of this decision was in any way predictable based on the "rules of the EU". If I owned a website that had a search engine and comparison shopping and email, I would not expect that it's somehow wrong if my search engine shows results from my service's comparison shopping and email. I would not expect that it's somehow my obligation to seek out comparison shopping services operated by my competitors and show them on the search engine in the same way as my company's product. There isn't even a general way to do that - am I obligated to design a custom protocol? This is borderline ridiculous, but is apparently the ruling. What precedent is there for imposing rules this this on other businesses? "You have to design new technology and build custom services that show business information for your competitors on your advertising/websites/properties"?
    - calcifer 9y ago
      > You're acting like the outcome of this decision was in any way predictable based on the "rules of the EU" Yes it was [0]. > If I owned a website that had a search engine and comparison shopping and email, I would not expect that it's somehow wrong if my search engine shows results from my service's comparison shopping and email If your search engine had a dominant position in the EU market and if you used that dominance to put your shopping product above other competitors', then yes, it would not only be wrong, but also illegal. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
    - matthewmacleod 9y ago
      You're acting like the outcome of this decision was in any way predictable based on the "rules of the EU" It was. There are specific requirements in Article 102 about abusing dominant market positions to "apply…dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage". If I owned a website that had a search engine and comparison shopping and email, I would not expect that it's somehow wrong if my search engine shows results from my service's comparison shopping and email. If you owned a massive market-dominating service, then your team of corporate lawyers should expect that. "You have to design new technology and build custom services that show business information for your competitors on your advertising/websites/properties"? That's not what happened though – the specific instruction is: the Decision orders Google to comply with the simple principle of giving equal treatment to rival comparison shopping services and its own service That's all, and it is not unreasonable to impose these terms of a market dominating force that has used that dominance to crowd out competition. What precedent is there for imposing rules this this on other businesses? SO MUCH. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm
- wukerplank 9y ago
  Or they could comply with EU laws to stop the knocking.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
  Yeah, surprising, isn't it? If you keep breaking the law, law enforcement will keep knocking on your door, who would have thought?

Considering how big the EU market is I'm sure the profit Google derives from it is many times this judgement.

jlebrech 9y ago

so EU can keep knocking on their door because google has no choice but to pay up?

calcifer 9y ago
Why shouldn't the EU keep knocking on Google's door if it keeps violating the law? Especially a law that protects the livelihoods of EU citizens.
matthewmacleod 9y ago
Well, they could consider not engaging in uncompetitive practices. The thing is, if they want to do business in the EU they have to abide by the rules of the EU. It's not that complex!
- xorium 9y ago
  It's not that complex! Corporate law is extremely complex.
  - matthewmacleod 9y ago
    That's a glib answer. Google is free to continue doing business in the EU and is does not 'have no choice but to pay up'. That's simple.
    - jlebrech 9y ago
      I think the more "complex" the EU tries to make it in order to extract money from big corps the harder it can also be for smaller firms if those rules apply to those also.
      - matthewmacleod 9y ago
        I see no evidence that the EU is legislating in order to extract money from corporations, so the very basis of your idea is flawed.
      - tripzilch 9y ago
        But this ruling is specifically about companies with market dominance, so it does very much not apply to smaller firms.
  - tripzilch 9y ago
    It seemed pretty clear-cut to me, from the well-written article :)
- Pyxl101 9y ago
  You're acting like the outcome of this decision was in any way predictable based on the "rules of the EU". If I owned a website that had a search engine and comparison shopping and email, I would not expect that it's somehow wrong if my search engine shows results from my service's comparison shopping and email. I would not expect that it's somehow my obligation to seek out comparison shopping services operated by my competitors and show them on the search engine in the same way as my company's product. There isn't even a general way to do that - am I obligated to design a custom protocol? This is borderline ridiculous, but is apparently the ruling. What precedent is there for imposing rules this this on other businesses? "You have to design new technology and build custom services that show business information for your competitors on your advertising/websites/properties"?
  - calcifer 9y ago
    > You're acting like the outcome of this decision was in any way predictable based on the "rules of the EU" Yes it was [0]. > If I owned a website that had a search engine and comparison shopping and email, I would not expect that it's somehow wrong if my search engine shows results from my service's comparison shopping and email If your search engine had a dominant position in the EU market and if you used that dominance to put your shopping product above other competitors', then yes, it would not only be wrong, but also illegal. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_competition_law
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - matthewmacleod 9y ago
    You're acting like the outcome of this decision was in any way predictable based on the "rules of the EU" It was. There are specific requirements in Article 102 about abusing dominant market positions to "apply…dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage". If I owned a website that had a search engine and comparison shopping and email, I would not expect that it's somehow wrong if my search engine shows results from my service's comparison shopping and email. If you owned a massive market-dominating service, then your team of corporate lawyers should expect that. "You have to design new technology and build custom services that show business information for your competitors on your advertising/websites/properties"? That's not what happened though – the specific instruction is: the Decision orders Google to comply with the simple principle of giving equal treatment to rival comparison shopping services and its own service That's all, and it is not unreasonable to impose these terms of a market dominating force that has used that dominance to crowd out competition. What precedent is there for imposing rules this this on other businesses? SO MUCH. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm
wukerplank 9y ago
Or they could comply with EU laws to stop the knocking.
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
Yeah, surprising, isn't it? If you keep breaking the law, law enforcement will keep knocking on your door, who would have thought?