5 ms·

Promoting stuff on one's own website isn't in any way shape or form illegal.

Youden 8y ago
Not true. See the record $2.7b fine Google got for promoting Google Shopping results in its search results. Also see why: For leveraging a dominant position in one market (search) to intrude on another market (shopping). This looks suspiciously similar. Google is leveraging a dominant position in search engines to intrude on the browser market.
- joeshmoe24 8y ago
  I'm talking about the US where google is also protected by the first amendment and not the bizarro world logic the EU uses to justify their protectionism (how are shopping ads different than any other search ads?!).
  - personjerry 8y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890 "The Sherman Act broadly prohibits (1) anticompetitive agreements and (2) unilateral conduct that monopolizes or attempts to monopolize the relevant market." For example, squashing competition by deleting your competitors search results might be interpreted as an attempt to monopolize the market. In the context of providing a marketplace (i.e. the App Store), we aren't really looking at "private free speech" any more and so the first amendment does not apply here.
    - joeshmoe24 8y ago
      Yes it does: https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-first-amendment-control-search-results-209034 https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-f... The worst thing about antitrust threads on HN is idiots trying to appear knowledgeable by skimming a Wikipedia article.
      - personjerry 8y ago
        That's an interesting case that I was not aware of. I think your attitude is suboptimal here.
tomohawk 8y ago
In the IBM antitrust case, IBM was forced to separate their OS and App businesses. Their OS business had to publish all of their APIs and was not allowed to communicate non-publicly with their App business. This was to prevent IBM from using their OS monopoly to gain an App monopoly. Once you are a monopoly, you can expect such restrictions. What Google is really good at is evading FTC regulation by staying within FCC jurisdiction. The FCC has historically been hand in hand with industry. The FTC has real teeth.
- joeshmoe24 8y ago
  > What Google is really good at is evading FTC regulation by staying within FCC jurisdiction. The FCC has historically been hand in hand with industry. The FTC has real teeth. This is nonsense. You're insulting the intelligence of everyone reading this.

Not true. See the record $2.7b fine Google got for promoting Google Shopping results in its search results. Also see why: For leveraging a dominant position in one market (search) to intrude on another market (shopping). This looks suspiciously similar. Google is leveraging a dominant position in search engines to intrude on the browser market.

joeshmoe24 8y ago
I'm talking about the US where google is also protected by the first amendment and not the bizarro world logic the EU uses to justify their protectionism (how are shopping ads different than any other search ads?!).
- personjerry 8y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890 "The Sherman Act broadly prohibits (1) anticompetitive agreements and (2) unilateral conduct that monopolizes or attempts to monopolize the relevant market." For example, squashing competition by deleting your competitors search results might be interpreted as an attempt to monopolize the market. In the context of providing a marketplace (i.e. the App Store), we aren't really looking at "private free speech" any more and so the first amendment does not apply here.
  - joeshmoe24 8y ago
    Yes it does: https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-first-amendment-control-search-results-209034 https://searchengineland.com/another-court-affirms-googles-f... The worst thing about antitrust threads on HN is idiots trying to appear knowledgeable by skimming a Wikipedia article.
    - personjerry 8y ago
      That's an interesting case that I was not aware of. I think your attitude is suboptimal here.

tomohawk 8y ago

In the IBM antitrust case, IBM was forced to separate their OS and App businesses. Their OS business had to publish all of their APIs and was not allowed to communicate non-publicly with their App business. This was to prevent IBM from using their OS monopoly to gain an App monopoly. Once you are a monopoly, you can expect such restrictions. What Google is really good at is evading FTC regulation by staying within FCC jurisdiction. The FCC has historically been hand in hand with industry. The FTC has real teeth.

joeshmoe24 8y ago
> What Google is really good at is evading FTC regulation by staying within FCC jurisdiction. The FCC has historically been hand in hand with industry. The FTC has real teeth. This is nonsense. You're insulting the intelligence of everyone reading this.