4 ms·

I'm pretty sure this will make things more expensive for consumers, in which case I doubt they will be all that happy about it. I could be wrong, but if the pho

I'm pretty sure this will make things more expensive for consumers, in which case I doubt they will be all that happy about it. I could be wrong, but if the phone manufacturers need to pay more for these licenses, I'm pretty sure they'll just raise prices to compensate.

jstanley 8y ago
Phone manufacturers don't need to bundle Google apps, and we'd all be better off if they didn't.
- dahfizz 8y ago
  If that were true, phone manufacturers would not be bundling google apps in the first place. Manufacturers choose to include the Google apps because it enhances the product
  - titusjohnson 8y ago
    You keep bringing this up as if TFA is not a direct refutation of that point.
    - joshuamorton 8y ago
      TFA doesn't actually refute this point. (not a lawyer) One of the differences between European and US monopoly law is that US law requires that consumers be harmed, while european law just requires a lack of competition. Thus, in the Europe, a "benevolent monopoly", so to speak, would still be regulated, even if it provided optimal outcomes to consumers. This is not the case in the US. In other words, people bundling the apps because they feel it enhances the product may still be illegal in Europe, if regulators feel that competition is stifled. For TFA to be a refutation of this point, it would need to be the same ruling in the US.
      - asr 8y ago
        This is not right. The EU only outlaws monopolies which do illegal things, just like the US: "Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position ... shall be prohibited...." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_102_of_the_Treaty_on_the_Functioning_of_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_102_of_the_Treaty_on_t... There is a difference in terms of how you go about proving "abuse," but it's a difference of degree, not of kind; in the US, there is more weight placed on "effects" analysis where you see if you can prove something bad actually happened, while in the EU it is often sufficient to show that the actions are the kind that are likely to result in bad things. But this is a generalization and both kinds of proof are considered in both places.
        joshuamorton 8y ago
        Let me clarify: the us, due to precedent, not statute, requires evidence of harm to consumers. The eu only requires evidence of abuse of market share (which could be read as either harm to businesses or actions which might harm consumers). In other words, if chrome were the objectively best browser, requiring it be bundled could be illegal in the eu and legal in the us. This is I think very similar to what you say in your second paragraph, but flavored a bit differently. In any case, it does mean the article isn't clear evidence of harm to consumers or that concerned would pick differently.
- AtlasLion 8y ago
  Sorry but most consumers do want Google apps.
- jackconnor 8y ago
  The point is, the many phone manufacturers who choose to do so will probably charge more now, no matter what people might be "better off with"
simion314 8y ago
They can though auction for a good deal, there are other browsers,email clients and calendars around, maybe they will get behind some open source apps and use those.

jstanley 8y ago

Phone manufacturers don't need to bundle Google apps, and we'd all be better off if they didn't.

dahfizz 8y ago
If that were true, phone manufacturers would not be bundling google apps in the first place. Manufacturers choose to include the Google apps because it enhances the product
- titusjohnson 8y ago
  You keep bringing this up as if TFA is not a direct refutation of that point.
  - joshuamorton 8y ago
    TFA doesn't actually refute this point. (not a lawyer) One of the differences between European and US monopoly law is that US law requires that consumers be harmed, while european law just requires a lack of competition. Thus, in the Europe, a "benevolent monopoly", so to speak, would still be regulated, even if it provided optimal outcomes to consumers. This is not the case in the US. In other words, people bundling the apps because they feel it enhances the product may still be illegal in Europe, if regulators feel that competition is stifled. For TFA to be a refutation of this point, it would need to be the same ruling in the US.
    - asr 8y ago
      This is not right. The EU only outlaws monopolies which do illegal things, just like the US: "Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position ... shall be prohibited...." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_102_of_the_Treaty_on_the_Functioning_of_the_European_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_102_of_the_Treaty_on_t... There is a difference in terms of how you go about proving "abuse," but it's a difference of degree, not of kind; in the US, there is more weight placed on "effects" analysis where you see if you can prove something bad actually happened, while in the EU it is often sufficient to show that the actions are the kind that are likely to result in bad things. But this is a generalization and both kinds of proof are considered in both places.
      - joshuamorton 8y ago
        Let me clarify: the us, due to precedent, not statute, requires evidence of harm to consumers. The eu only requires evidence of abuse of market share (which could be read as either harm to businesses or actions which might harm consumers). In other words, if chrome were the objectively best browser, requiring it be bundled could be illegal in the eu and legal in the us. This is I think very similar to what you say in your second paragraph, but flavored a bit differently. In any case, it does mean the article isn't clear evidence of harm to consumers or that concerned would pick differently.
AtlasLion 8y ago
Sorry but most consumers do want Google apps.
jackconnor 8y ago
The point is, the many phone manufacturers who choose to do so will probably charge more now, no matter what people might be "better off with"

simion314 8y ago

They can though auction for a good deal, there are other browsers,email clients and calendars around, maybe they will get behind some open source apps and use those.