10 ms·
Amazon started this fight by blocking sales of Apple TV and Chromecasts on Amazon.com. That really should have attracted some anti trust concerns. Other compani
by ikeboy 9y ago
Amazon started this fight by blocking sales of Apple TV and Chromecasts on Amazon.com. That really should have attracted some anti trust concerns. Other companies deciding to fight back is perfectly legitimate.
- mrgordon 9y agoYeah I was shocked to read a different article that appeared to blame Google for their action. Seems like Amazon asked for this one. I was just thinking the other day how weird it is they don't sell Apple TV.
- AznHisoka 9y agoGoogle should respond by blocking Amazon in their search results. Then Amazon will really see who gets hurt the most.
- trekforever 9y agoBetter yet - Google Maps should change the directions when someone is navigating to an Amazon office to end up at a sewage treatment plant instead
- noncoml 9y agoWhat's going on with HN??
- letsgetphysITal 9y agoContent quality decreases as popularity increases. HN is about to go full Tumblr / Digg / reddit.
- thirdsun 9y agoWhile certainly effective, it would also be a good way to paint Google as the villain in this matter. It's childish, irrational behaviour in my opinion.
- jhasse 9y agoThey already have the villain image. Doesn't matter though, as everyone is forced to use their services anyway.
- jacksmith21006 9y agoChildish? All that Amazon will listen to. Amazon anti competitive behavior is out of hand. They have now pulled Twitch from the Roku. Google should do what Amazon does and when search for a Fire give the person a chromecast.
- ktta 9y agoThis will break the search integrity that Google says it upholds(leaving out government and DMCA requests)
- cube00 9y agoJust treat them in the same way; integrity upheld. In response to a competitor being a big meanie, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read about why they smell in our blog.
- noncoml 9y agoA retailer not carrying one item, is different from a search engine blocking results.
- Joakal 9y agoA search engine can simply not crawl Amazon's sites.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- namdnay 9y agoThe problem isn't Amazon retailer not carrying the Chromecast, it's Amazon marketplace refusing to let any retailers carry the Chromecast. A lot uglier IMHO
- deanCommie 9y agoWhy? Search is a service provided by a company trying to make money, just as a retailer. Just because it's an invaluable service now core to using the internet, doesn't make it a public utility. Here's the actual difference: If Google started blocking Amazon search results there would be an upoar. Amazon has blocked selling certain Google items, and there is barely a whimper. Here's the other difference: When GOogle shows Amazon search results, and users go through those results to make an Amazon purchase, Google gets a cut. That's how e-commerce works on the internet.
- noncoml 9y ago> Why? Search is a service provided by a company trying to make money, just as a retailer. I don't have any horses in this race, so I am not trying to take anybody's side, but since you ask, here is my opinion: A retailer is by default selecting what items to sell. A search engine is by default crawling everything. So one is kind of opt-in and the other opt-out.
- CaptSpify 9y ago
- Itsdijital 9y agoThis would be way worse for google than amazon.
- jacksmith21006 9y agoGoogle has all the leverage. Amazon already used what they had by banning Chromecast from their store. Google could remove Amazon app from play store. Or remove Amazon from search. Or change terms of Android that Amazon uses for the Fire and Echo.
- mrep 9y agoGoogle has 63.9% market share. That's way more risky. They already got in trouble with the European union for promoting their own sites in search due to their market share.
- jhasse 9y agoThe damage done to Amazon would benefit them a lot more than the laughable fine from the EU would hurt.
- ocdtrekkie 9y agoConsider that the width and depth of Google's anticompetitive violations is already massive, and increasing. The EU's record-breaking fine against Google was the first of three. There is a point where the EU may have to take steps beyond fines, and bar Google from doing business in... effectively, an entire continent. I don't know where that point is, but if a company doesn't really care about the fines for it's illegal activity and continues to violate the law, you've got to escalate. And that wouldn't just impact Google's global profits, but it'd likely entail shutting down multiple Google offices in multiple countries, and if their employees weren't interested in immigrating to another country, they'd potentially lose a lot of talent as well.
- jhasse 9y ago> The EU's record-breaking fine against Google was the first of three. I just had a look at Alphabet's stock graph from this year. I couldn't tell from it when the fine happened. So I guess they can afford another two of those. > There is a point where the EU may have to take steps beyond fines, and bar Google from doing business in... effectively, an entire continent. I doubt that we're anywhere near that point. Google is way too important, I also guess that the population wouldn't like everything-Google gone. Google could even threaten to brick all Android phones in the EU, no one would risk that.
- ocdtrekkie 9y agoConsidering that most Android phones are built and sold by other companies, can you possibly imagine Google surviving as a company through that? Consider that if Google was to brick Android phones in the EU, Samsung, HTC, LG, Motorola, etc. would all immediately drop their platforms, globally? And not just those corporations would be suing, but carriers who sold the affected phones in every country applicable as well. Carriers in other countries like the US would also shift away from selling products that Google could arbitrarily brick. At risk of losing their data due to a legal fight, everyone would migrate their email away from Gmail. Businesses would transfer away from G Suite. Google would never even threaten to brick all Android phones, because even threatening it would likely put them out of business.
- jacksmith21006 9y agoAgree that until Amazon behaves should remove from search. Also remove from play store. Amazon has now pulled Twitch from the Roku and their anti competitive behavior needs to be checked. Enough is enough.
- jacksmith21006 9y agoOr Google should do what Amazon does and when you search on a Fire give you a chromecast.
- balls187 9y agoEven then it was tit-for-tat. According to Amazon, they no longer sold AppleTV due to Apple refusing to have an Amazon Video App on AppleTV unless Amazon met Apple's terms.
- nialv7 9y agoWhat? Am I insane? Why don't Google take legal action? What it's doing now is completely barbaric. And Google supports Net Neutrality too. Isn't what it is doing exactly opposite to the spirit of Net Neutrality? Just because your opponent did something bad, doesn't mean it's ok to sink to their level.
- icebraining 9y agoYou can't take legal action against a store for its refusal to sell your products...
- rkangel 9y agoI'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you can if you can prove to the court that the behaviour is anti-competitive. Amazon being so dominant in the web retail space makes that argument easier.
- 0xFFC 9y agoI am no expert, but maybe the have calculated the price and etc, and came to the conclusion of blocking Youtube on Amazon platform would be cheaper option for them than for example going to legal battle with Amazon. Isn’t this a possibility?
- nolemurs 9y agoI would wager that Amazon is pretty safe on this one. Some quick googling suggests that Amazon has less than 20% market share in consumer electronics. They're the biggest player, but there are lots of other big players (Walmart, Target, Best Buy). I'm pretty sure you need a lot more market share than that before any judge is going to rule your behavior as anti-competitive.
- talmand 9y agoThat's an interesting thought to compare such things to traditional brick-and-mortar situations. A store that dominates its market tends to cause competing stores to close. Which creates the problem in that customers get fewer choices in stores to buy products. This would create the possibility that a dominate store would take steps to cause the competition to shut down; such as price dumping or other unethical things. But that problem doesn't happen on the web. There's absolutely nothing Amazon could do to prevent Google from selling their product on their own site. I mean, price dumping could still be an issue but it seems no one considers that one anymore. So how can it be proven that Amazon is anti-competitive by refusing to sell a product on their site that competes directly with one of their products sold on their site? Especially when the competitor has no barrier created by Amazon to prevent them from selling the product on their own site? After all, to be fair, shouldn't I be able to purchase an Amazon product on Google's site?
- taneq 9y agoIs Wal-Mart also obliged to carry their competitors' brands? It's weird how when tech companies start getting big, they seem to graduate to this almost-but-not-quite-common-carrier-status where they're sort of a private company and sort of a public service.
- ikeboy 9y agoWalmart is not a marketplace (edit: at least in store. Online they have a marketplace). Anybody can sign up and sell on Amazon, and they can sell anything with some exceptions. One of those exceptions is chromecasts or apple tvs.
- noncoml 9y ago> Blocking sales of Apple TV and Chromecasts on Amazon.com Did they block them, or do they simple not carry them? It is completely different.
- ehsankia 9y agoCould you explain the difference? Are you saying that Google specifically doesn't want their product on Amazon, because that would be insane.
- noncoml 9y ago1. Blocking sales, is Google or somebody else trying to open a merchant account to sell Google products and Amazon blocking them. 2. Not carrying them, is Amazon simply not having an interest in carrying the item as a retailer. Aren't they two completely different things?
- Spare_account 9y agoBoth are true. No-one, Amazon directly or Marketplace resellers, is allowed to sell Chromecast on Amazon.
- jhasse 9y agoWell, Amazon directly is allowed. They just don't want to ;)
- jacksmith21006 9y agoPlus give you a Fire stick when search on a chromecast.
- eisregen_ 9y agoAmazon is a marketplace where everyone can sell anything (legal). Well except AppleTV and Google Chromecasts because they are blocked. If they wouldn't just be listed, no reseller would have a offer listed with said product on amazon
- IshKebab 9y agoIf it were the youtube app or API then I would agree. But Google is blocking youtube.com based on the user-agent. That seems wrong.
- jhasse 9y agoOne more reason that the user-agent has to go.
- jacksmith21006 9y agoPlus Amazon hijacked someone search on Amazon for a Chromecast and gave them a fire stick. Hope Google can set Amazon right.