9 ms·
This is an anti-trust case. Google has no monopoly in most of their endeavors, for example there are thousands of email providers and ad networks. On the other
by Grollicus 8y ago
This is an anti-trust case. Google has no monopoly in most of their endeavors, for example there are thousands of email providers and ad networks.
On the other hand, they caught themselfes a fine last year over the inability to "un-Google" Android phones: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/technology/google-eu-android-fine.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/technology/google-eu-andr...
- bubblethink 8y agoThere has been no corresponding action in the US regarding the vendors' ability to sell phones without google play services. Which is a shame because I doubt if EU alone is a big enough market for vendors to create new products without google play services. At least there haven't been any such announcements about new products since the ruling. Is EFF or any other body putting pressure in the US ?
- simplecomplex 8y agoIs it illegal to sell phones with google play services? Which law? Which case is this?
- bubblethink 8y agoWithout. TLDR: If you as a vendor sell a single phone with google play services, you cannot sell any other AOSP based phone without google play services. EU ruled against this. I don't know how the US allows this.
- nabla9 8y agoCompetition laws and anti-monopoly laws hit long before monopolies are formed. Real monopolies are relatively rare. Most anti-monopoly regulations worry about 'monopoly power' or 'dominant power' where companies can start to ignore competition or price signals. For the purpose of controlling mergers, the combined market share of 25% or more of a specific market is usually refereed to anti-trust regulators who can intervene or set conditions.