24 ms·

Google's Monopoly-Based Foreign Policy

336 points by DeusExMachina 7y ago

jdkee 7y ago
Google should be broken up like the Bell system was in the 80s.
- techntoke 7y ago
  Let's do Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Comcast and many others too. Unless you're just on the Google hater bandwagon.
- bilekas 7y ago
  Why ? Maybe some proper regulation written by people who know what they're talking about would be a better start no ? The nuclear option of : 'Oh break them up, they're out of control' is such a fallacy. Maybe if lawmakers were clued in on what large companies like Facebook, Google actually did, they might just set better rules.
  - banads 7y ago
    Fair point, but, I think we all can agree "proper regulation written by people who know what they're talking about" is extremely unlikely to happen.
- anticensor 7y ago
  Google cannot be broken up. It needs to be torn down on short (~14 days) notice.
amb23 7y ago
> Google said it was willing to ‘work with’ Turkey, but as a partner and not as a corporation working within a sovereign nation. It simply said it doesn’t like Turkey’s law, and so it will stop providing Android phones for an entire country. In other words, Google has a private sanctions regime against smaller countries. The fact that Google even has the leverage to blackout an entire country like this--and that it's legally allowed to do so--is the best reason I've seen so far to break up Big Tech. They're playing with fire and undermining the U.S. diplomatic community by mixing public and private interests in a way that supersedes national policy. Both Android and Chrome need to be spun out--at this point they are basically public utilities.
- bilekas 7y ago
  > -and that it's legally allowed to do so--is the best reason I've seen so far to break up Big Tech. Of course it is legal.. Nobody can tell a company who they HAVE to sell their product to.. But you want to break it up and what then exactly.. ? > Both Android and Chrome need to be spun out--at this point they are basically public utilities No, they're not.. And they're not a fundamental right either.
  - techntoke 7y ago
    Chromium is already open source.
    - bilekas 7y ago
      Technically so is Android but thats a whole other can of worms..
  - jessaustin 7y ago
    Nobody can tell a company who they HAVE to sell their product to. Lots of court cases have forced merchants to sell to minorities to whom they would rather have not sold.
    - bilekas 7y ago
      Could you share on some references to products and not services forced to be sold ? Also policy based and not discriminatory based..
    - gtfratteus 7y ago
      Completely irrelevant unless you know of a case where an American court forced a company to sell to Turkey.
  - anoncake 7y ago
    > Nobody can tell a company who they HAVE to sell their product to.. Of course the state can do that.
atlasunshrugged 7y ago
I'm generally pro competition but I feel like there's probably more to this story (just remembering how eBay also left Turkey). Aren't there some issues with how the data is supposed to be stored in Turkey (a place where many people including journalists are jailed and does not rank highly as a Democratic country) that would also make Google more likely to just up and leave or outright negotiate with the government over the laws rather than directly give in? Of course, I get the argument for how Google is too powerful with their system, I don't disagree, but I'm skeptical in general of trying to do fair business with Russia and Turkey given their track records
- bayindirh 7y ago
  > just remembering how eBay also left Turkey eBay didn't leave Turkey. They've bought http://www.gittigidiyor.com http://www.gittigidiyor.com and continuing to operate. They're still here, just under a different brand. They've bought their fiercest local competitor.
  - atlasunshrugged 7y ago
    Sorry, you're absolutely right, I meant PayPal and obviously they haven't been the same company for quite some time! https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/31/paypal-to-halt-operations-in-turkey-after-losing-license-impacts-hundreds-of-thousands/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/31/paypal-to-halt-operations-...
- mhet 7y ago
  ebay did not left Turkey. They acquired a local ecommerce and they are operating over that one now. It wasn't able to compete then it just bought it.
- duck2 7y ago
  Note that the regulation isn't about backdoors or data storage. Google is fined because of tying Search to Android, which is decided as anti-competitive by Russia and EU. I think they pulled out to avoid paying the fine, but this might prove to be a monopoly exerting tactic as well. There is just no other explanation of pulling out of a market just because you have to un-tie your products now.
owlninja 7y ago
Perhaps I am not understanding the implications, but is Google supposed to be forced to make its phones available in Turkey?
- huffmsa 7y ago
  > is Google supposed to be forced to make its phones available in Turkey Well yes, because free trade, globalization, equality and other buzzwords. /s The reality is that historical big companies have always sparred with nation-states. Usually the EIC, but occasionally other firms. They went roughly 50/50. "Won" in China. Lost in America. OPEC said "no oil for you" and it worked. And no one invaded or otherwise compelled them to sell oil to people they didn't like.
  - matthewdgreen 7y ago
    > OPEC said "no oil for you" and it worked. And no one invaded or otherwise compelled them to sell oil to people they didn't like. This is like world history as told by Dreamworks.
    - huffmsa 7y ago
      They didn't invade immediately. And yes, it ultimately drove the west to start developing it's own oil resources and become less reliant on OPEC products, but that worked in the wests favor, as you would expect internal development of a Googledroid replacement to go for Turkey. Seems to be going okay for China. And the EIC ultimately lost influence in China and India and was no more. So it might be in a company's best interest to play nice with nation-states
- matthewdgreen 7y ago
  Google is perfectly capable of untying their search from Android via a software update, because that’s the remedy they already developed and use in Russia. Turkey is asking them to turn on the same capability. Google is saying they could but that they won’t, because Turkey isn’t a big enough country to make them. And yes, if Google is breaking US and international anti-trust laws, “forcing” people to do things is generally the remedy of last resort.
delfinom 7y ago
Yea there's alot of emotional bickering that comes up when a company says "we won't do business with X". >In other words, Google has a private sanctions regime against smaller countries. With this stupid statement, my company must have a private sanctions regime agaisnt half the world
- chottocharaii 7y ago
  The distinction is that if your company boycotted another, is unlikely to ever be diplomatically or politically important; unless you work at Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, or Google
  - true_religion 7y ago
    Or the boycott is part of a common industry practice like Disney/ Netflix distribution rules.
- phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
  Your company probably isn't as important to the world as Google. To the point, though: go read the Reuters article[0] linked from TFA. They're not pulling out of Turkey; they're refusing to license software to "business partners" making products for Turkey unless those partners lock search to Google. Is your company really boycotting half the countries of the world because they have rules in place regarding your business practices? [0]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-google/google-warns-turkish-partners-over-new-android-phones-amid-dispute-idUSKBN1YK0QR https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-google/google-warn...
  - pathseeker 7y ago
    > Your company probably isn't as important to the world as Google. Google isn't that important to the world. China gets by just fine without it and not having access is mainly a mild inconvenience.
- ulfw 7y ago
  And this is exactly why we should not allow companies to become worldwide monopolies.
baybal2 7y ago
The giant still has legs of clay. China still has an overwhelming edge in manufacturing, with Vietnam and Thailand being years away from reaching even 10% of its capacity. They can easily legally mandate everybody to use "Huaweidroid" and make sure that chipmakers bake in their key fingerprints, so the firmware can't be changed outside of China. With anything like that unfolding, there will simply be no way out of this for Google, unless they commit to a truly herculean task of starting own manufacturing somewhere else. But even in this case, they will have to commit to competition with now much cheaper "Huaweidroid" based phones
pmlnr 7y ago
> The regulator had asked Google to change all its software distribution agreements to allow consumers to choose different search engines in its Android mobile operating system. Hang on a second... why does the MS regulation to offer browser choice on first run apply to this already?
- ptah 7y ago
  Turkey is not in the EU yet
jessaustin 7y ago
Google also operate in USA. USA has more people in prison than Turkey has. Recently journalist Max Blumenthal was jailed on false charges.
- jacquesm 7y ago
  > Google also operate in USA. They're based there, in case you didn't notice. > USA has more people in prison than Turkey has. And is substantially larger, and tends to not lock up everybody that might be against dear leader. For now. > Recently journalist Max Blumenthal was jailed on false charges. Definitely not a very good moment in the history of the USA but there are plenty of worse examples and besides the case was dropped. You really can not compare Turkey and the United States in this way.
  - DSingularity 7y ago
    Why not? Turkey survived a coup. We can critique the governments handling all day but can we at least all agree that when a democracy barely survives a coup it ought to institute policies to solidify the rule of law and endurance of its institutions?
    - Twixes 7y ago
      Turkey did not survive a coup, Erdogan survived a "coup"
    - jupp0r 7y ago
      Your premise of democracy is wrong. Turkey is an authoritarian dictatorship at this point.
      - eeZah7Ux 7y ago
        ...and the US is shockingly close to being one.
        colejohnson66 7y ago
seunosewa 7y ago
The article was masterfully framed to make us feel outraged by Google’s exercise of its right to chose where it does business. When Google pulls out of a country, it loses a lot, and so does the country. This is a strong incentive for both parties to be reasonable. Forcing Google to obey every government in the world doesn’t seem fair; many countries have unreasonable or evil laws.
- black_puppydog 7y ago
  OTOH: forcing every country in the world to obey google is no better.
  - hartator 7y ago
    It is. Google hasn’t killed anyone so far that disagrees with them. Plenty of governments does.
    - bayindirh 7y ago
      No, it’s not. We didn’t give Microsoft a free pass when they did monopolistic moves. Google should not be treated differently.
      - dahfizz 7y ago
        You're moving the goalposts. The comment above yours says (and quite rightly) that Google does not have the power of a government and shouldn't be considered as such. And your response is "but Microsoft!".
        bayindirh 7y ago
        Thanks for your answer. Sorry, it was not intentional. I'll try to explain myself better. In today's world, some of the corporations size and influence allows them to behave the way the want and, I see this as problematic. Google may not be killing anyone who disagrees with them and, they can freely decide where to conduct business. I have no problem with these points. However, I see Google's behavior as problematic. Google's response dşffers from country to country. They have a similar problem in EU (more specifically European Economic Area) and, they have implemented a selection screen similar to Microsoft's browser & search engine selection screen. Turkey might not be in EU but, as a country it has every right to level the playing field for the companies (in this case Yandex and Google) in order to increase the competition. The but Microsoft! response is coming from the change of tone in response to this issue. When Microsoft became the monopoly and pushed Sun Microsystems and other browsers around, the unanimous vote was to divide or somewhat stop them. When Google does a similar thing, response changes with respect to country which Google has a dispute. I find this wrong. P.S.: I'm a bit tired and English is not my native language. If I messed the writing, please point it out. I'll try to clarify.
Jonnax 7y ago
This story is about Google not wanting to have a browser choice screen for the bundled Chrome application to give a choice of either Yandex or Google search??? It doesn't sound that's all there is here. Perhaps a Yandex app store? Or perhaps this is about data residency? But also the author here is arguing that Android is a state asset and the choice to restrict usage to a country is the job of the government. Seems like a silly idea to me.
stevespang 7y ago
Awesome read, Matt.
qtplatypus 7y ago
I’ve just read the Reuters story that is linked. The Turkish government said that they were not legally permitted to sell phones with the current contract; so Google stopped selling an illegal product until they could resolve the issue. If Google kept selling the phones without resolving the issue then they would be subject to fines. How is complying with local laws a Dangerous Foreign Policy act?
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- Kalium 7y ago
  > “We’ve informed our business partners that we will not be able to work with them on new Android phones to be released for the Turkish market,” the Google statement said. The article also says that Google won't be working with their business partners on new phones. The article spins this as demanding to "work with" Turkey, which strikes me as an overstatement in service of the argument that Google is discriminating against smaller countries. The author does seem to believe that Google should be compelled to do a maximum amount of business in every possible market until the State Department steps in. It's the authors contention that doing less than this is a Dangerous Foreign Policy Act.
- nebulous1 7y ago
  Well, it says Google were informed of this in 2018, and that the hammer didn't come down until late 2019. I think it's fair to say that Google intend to stop dealing with Turkey rather than comply with the local law, they're not temporarily pulling their products while they "resolve the issue". Whether or not you see this as merely a company pulling out of a market where they don't like the regulations or a Dangerous Foreign Policy is another question. I assume that the author sees is as the latter due to Google's immense size and power.
whack 7y ago
TLDR: Turkey wanted to regulate Google's activities in the Turkish market, and so, Google decided to exit the Turkish market entirely. I'm all in favor of vigorous anti-trust enforcement, and I think the Turkish regulators did the right thing. American/European regulators can probably take some pages out of their playbook. But it seems ridiculous to blame a company for choosing which markets it wants to do business in.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
steelframe 7y ago
Ah, it's so nice to have my morning coffee with my daily fresh anti-Google story on the front page of Hacker News. Our lives just wouldn't be the same without it.
- ggambetta 7y ago
  Yeah, I don't get it. FB is being openly evil with the political ads thing, but Google is the devil somehow? I suspect a smear campaign.
  - kevingadd 7y ago
    Two things can be different and still both be bad. Are you claiming everyone on HN loves FB and hates Google? Because that is a pretty strong claim to make. Same goes for the tech press in general, it's not hard to find negative articles about FB and Google on the same website or from the same source. If you type "matt stoller facebook" into Google Search (the devil's search engine) one of the top results on the first page is a criticism of Facebook... by Matt Stoller: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/22/restructure-facebook-ftc-regulate-9-steps-now https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/22/restru... If you're going to suspect a smear campaign or conspiracy that's fine, but please at least make a basic effort to validate your theory before posting it on HN
    - gundmc 7y ago
      OP was talking about what gets upvoted to the front page of HN, not necessarily what gets written by the source. Try searching "Matt Stoller Facebook" and then "Matt Stoller Google" on HN.
- netwanderer3 7y ago
  It almost feels like there is an active campaign against them at this point. There used to be a smear campaign against Google which was orchestrated by Facebook a while ago, around the time when Cambridge Analytica scandal was discovered, just to take the heat off themselves. It is difficult to guess who is behind this new campaign.
KirinDave 7y ago
If ever there was a moment where a good open source phone OS as GUI toolkit could break onto the market, that time is now.
netwanderer3 7y ago
On paper, this is not really wrong. You can't force a shop owner to sell his products to you if he doesn't want to. Similarly, I just don't have the rights in forcing you to sell your house to me. I'm sure services like Netflix or Disney Plus are probably still not available in some countries. If you visit their website from those places, you would likely get a service denial message. It's within Google's rights to offer/withdraw their services to any places they wish. Having said that, maybe there was a better solution they could have implemented instead. Something like this should only be the very last choice on the list after exhausting all other options.
- lucb1e 7y ago
  > You can't force a shop owner to sell his products to you if he doesn't want to. The very first article of the Dutch constitution actually says that people have to be treated equally in equal cases. If you live in a country with a similar principle, do you know how this works with someone refusing to do business with you? If they sell to your peer, wouldn't they have to have a reason for not selling to you (i.e. to indicate that the case is unequal)? A reason like creditworthiness or "looking like you won't pay the bill" may or may not be sufficient, I'm not questioning which reasons may be used. I'm just wondering if it's true that a shop can indeed refuse someone for no reason at all. For those who are curious about the phrasing, source (in Dutch unfortunately): https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001840/2018-12-21 https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001840/2018-12-21
  - pdonis 7y ago
    > The very first article of the Dutch constitution actually says that people have to be treated equally in equal cases. Is that supposed to apply to the Dutch government? Or to everyone? Constitutions normally say what the government can and can't do; they don't normally directly tell ordinary citizens what they can and can't do.
    - bryanrasmussen 7y ago
      Are you sure what is normative for Constitutions? I suppose in this case normally just means in most cases.
bradj 7y ago
I don't see how this is a controversy. Turkey made a legal judgement, and Google decided the cost of compliance was too high so instead of thwarting the law and risk legal liability they retreated from the country. The threat of Monopoly by Google in Turkey is gone - so congrats? You shouldn't force a company to provide you the opportunity to by their product (outside of certain circumstances regarding protected classes in the US).
DERRICKBRIAN 7y ago
IF YOU WANTS TO JOIN ILLUMINATE BROTHER HOOD MAKE SURE YOU'RE LOYAL AND SERIOUS MINDED INDIVIDUAL. I wanna give a concise testimony of how I became rich and famous Read and pay keen interest..... We all underestimate the opportunity that comes across us in life, waking up to see a testimony like this is a blessing no man can pay for. Ten years ago, I feed from hand to mouth but today am a bonafide member of ILLUMINATE BROTHER HOOD, it's a dream come true. Back before I got initiated, I have always been curious to join the hood until I came across a testimony online about the illuminate and I decided to make a bold step by following its instructions, lol and behold am a proud member of the hood and ready to help whosoever that's willing to join the hood. Before I left you with the link , let me quickly drop you a tips of your benefits as a new member of the hood. Regardless of your professions, the hood will stand firm and support you with it, all that is expected of you, is your loyalty. And after your initiation, you will be awarded immediately with your benefits such as you desired, that's is to say , the illuminate hood gives benefits according to your wish and desires. As a matter of fact, the hood always welcome, serious and loyal new members that wants to join. So therefore, make sure you're interested before you emails us at initiationhoodofilluminate@gmail.com but you can still call the office line on +1(202) 750-0111 for further information.
notSupplied 7y ago
Microsoft eventually caved, and put a "Browser Choice" popup in Windows. This was because the US was too big for MS to ignore. Here, we have a similar choice: Turkey wants Google to give users "Search Engine Choice", and because Turkey is relatively small of a market compared to Google's TAM, they decided they'd rather ignore than market than compromise, even though a compromise is probably the best outcome for users, for fair competition. I think the author is not talking about what Google has a right to do or not do, nor do any moral obligation to play in which field. The problem being highlighted here is that size simply matters too much.

336 points by DeusExMachina 7y ago

jdkee 7y ago

Google should be broken up like the Bell system was in the 80s.

techntoke 7y ago
Let's do Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Comcast and many others too. Unless you're just on the Google hater bandwagon.
bilekas 7y ago
Why ? Maybe some proper regulation written by people who know what they're talking about would be a better start no ? The nuclear option of : 'Oh break them up, they're out of control' is such a fallacy. Maybe if lawmakers were clued in on what large companies like Facebook, Google actually did, they might just set better rules.
- banads 7y ago
  Fair point, but, I think we all can agree "proper regulation written by people who know what they're talking about" is extremely unlikely to happen.
anticensor 7y ago
Google cannot be broken up. It needs to be torn down on short (~14 days) notice.

amb23 7y ago

> Google said it was willing to ‘work with’ Turkey, but as a partner and not as a corporation working within a sovereign nation. It simply said it doesn’t like Turkey’s law, and so it will stop providing Android phones for an entire country. In other words, Google has a private sanctions regime against smaller countries. The fact that Google even has the leverage to blackout an entire country like this--and that it's legally allowed to do so--is the best reason I've seen so far to break up Big Tech. They're playing with fire and undermining the U.S. diplomatic community by mixing public and private interests in a way that supersedes national policy. Both Android and Chrome need to be spun out--at this point they are basically public utilities.

bilekas 7y ago
> -and that it's legally allowed to do so--is the best reason I've seen so far to break up Big Tech. Of course it is legal.. Nobody can tell a company who they HAVE to sell their product to.. But you want to break it up and what then exactly.. ? > Both Android and Chrome need to be spun out--at this point they are basically public utilities No, they're not.. And they're not a fundamental right either.
- techntoke 7y ago
  Chromium is already open source.
  - bilekas 7y ago
    Technically so is Android but thats a whole other can of worms..
- jessaustin 7y ago
  Nobody can tell a company who they HAVE to sell their product to. Lots of court cases have forced merchants to sell to minorities to whom they would rather have not sold.
  - bilekas 7y ago
    Could you share on some references to products and not services forced to be sold ? Also policy based and not discriminatory based..
  - gtfratteus 7y ago
    Completely irrelevant unless you know of a case where an American court forced a company to sell to Turkey.
- anoncake 7y ago
  > Nobody can tell a company who they HAVE to sell their product to.. Of course the state can do that.

atlasunshrugged 7y ago

I'm generally pro competition but I feel like there's probably more to this story (just remembering how eBay also left Turkey). Aren't there some issues with how the data is supposed to be stored in Turkey (a place where many people including journalists are jailed and does not rank highly as a Democratic country) that would also make Google more likely to just up and leave or outright negotiate with the government over the laws rather than directly give in? Of course, I get the argument for how Google is too powerful with their system, I don't disagree, but I'm skeptical in general of trying to do fair business with Russia and Turkey given their track records

bayindirh 7y ago
> just remembering how eBay also left Turkey eBay didn't leave Turkey. They've bought http://www.gittigidiyor.com http://www.gittigidiyor.com and continuing to operate. They're still here, just under a different brand. They've bought their fiercest local competitor.
- atlasunshrugged 7y ago
  Sorry, you're absolutely right, I meant PayPal and obviously they haven't been the same company for quite some time! https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/31/paypal-to-halt-operations-in-turkey-after-losing-license-impacts-hundreds-of-thousands/ https://techcrunch.com/2016/05/31/paypal-to-halt-operations-...
mhet 7y ago
ebay did not left Turkey. They acquired a local ecommerce and they are operating over that one now. It wasn't able to compete then it just bought it.
duck2 7y ago
Note that the regulation isn't about backdoors or data storage. Google is fined because of tying Search to Android, which is decided as anti-competitive by Russia and EU. I think they pulled out to avoid paying the fine, but this might prove to be a monopoly exerting tactic as well. There is just no other explanation of pulling out of a market just because you have to un-tie your products now.

owlninja 7y ago

Perhaps I am not understanding the implications, but is Google supposed to be forced to make its phones available in Turkey?

huffmsa 7y ago
> is Google supposed to be forced to make its phones available in Turkey Well yes, because free trade, globalization, equality and other buzzwords. /s The reality is that historical big companies have always sparred with nation-states. Usually the EIC, but occasionally other firms. They went roughly 50/50. "Won" in China. Lost in America. OPEC said "no oil for you" and it worked. And no one invaded or otherwise compelled them to sell oil to people they didn't like.
- matthewdgreen 7y ago
  > OPEC said "no oil for you" and it worked. And no one invaded or otherwise compelled them to sell oil to people they didn't like. This is like world history as told by Dreamworks.
  - huffmsa 7y ago
    They didn't invade immediately. And yes, it ultimately drove the west to start developing it's own oil resources and become less reliant on OPEC products, but that worked in the wests favor, as you would expect internal development of a Googledroid replacement to go for Turkey. Seems to be going okay for China. And the EIC ultimately lost influence in China and India and was no more. So it might be in a company's best interest to play nice with nation-states
matthewdgreen 7y ago
Google is perfectly capable of untying their search from Android via a software update, because that’s the remedy they already developed and use in Russia. Turkey is asking them to turn on the same capability. Google is saying they could but that they won’t, because Turkey isn’t a big enough country to make them. And yes, if Google is breaking US and international anti-trust laws, “forcing” people to do things is generally the remedy of last resort.

delfinom 7y ago

Yea there's alot of emotional bickering that comes up when a company says "we won't do business with X". >In other words, Google has a private sanctions regime against smaller countries. With this stupid statement, my company must have a private sanctions regime agaisnt half the world

chottocharaii 7y ago
The distinction is that if your company boycotted another, is unlikely to ever be diplomatically or politically important; unless you work at Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, or Google
- true_religion 7y ago
  Or the boycott is part of a common industry practice like Disney/ Netflix distribution rules.
phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
Your company probably isn't as important to the world as Google. To the point, though: go read the Reuters article[0] linked from TFA. They're not pulling out of Turkey; they're refusing to license software to "business partners" making products for Turkey unless those partners lock search to Google. Is your company really boycotting half the countries of the world because they have rules in place regarding your business practices? [0]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-google/google-warns-turkish-partners-over-new-android-phones-amid-dispute-idUSKBN1YK0QR https://www.reuters.com/article/us-turkey-google/google-warn...
- pathseeker 7y ago
  > Your company probably isn't as important to the world as Google. Google isn't that important to the world. China gets by just fine without it and not having access is mainly a mild inconvenience.
ulfw 7y ago
And this is exactly why we should not allow companies to become worldwide monopolies.

baybal2 7y ago

The giant still has legs of clay. China still has an overwhelming edge in manufacturing, with Vietnam and Thailand being years away from reaching even 10% of its capacity. They can easily legally mandate everybody to use "Huaweidroid" and make sure that chipmakers bake in their key fingerprints, so the firmware can't be changed outside of China. With anything like that unfolding, there will simply be no way out of this for Google, unless they commit to a truly herculean task of starting own manufacturing somewhere else. But even in this case, they will have to commit to competition with now much cheaper "Huaweidroid" based phones

pmlnr 7y ago

> The regulator had asked Google to change all its software distribution agreements to allow consumers to choose different search engines in its Android mobile operating system. Hang on a second... why does the MS regulation to offer browser choice on first run apply to this already?

ptah 7y ago
Turkey is not in the EU yet

jessaustin 7y ago

Google also operate in USA. USA has more people in prison than Turkey has. Recently journalist Max Blumenthal was jailed on false charges.

jacquesm 7y ago
> Google also operate in USA. They're based there, in case you didn't notice. > USA has more people in prison than Turkey has. And is substantially larger, and tends to not lock up everybody that might be against dear leader. For now. > Recently journalist Max Blumenthal was jailed on false charges. Definitely not a very good moment in the history of the USA but there are plenty of worse examples and besides the case was dropped. You really can not compare Turkey and the United States in this way.
- DSingularity 7y ago
  Why not? Turkey survived a coup. We can critique the governments handling all day but can we at least all agree that when a democracy barely survives a coup it ought to institute policies to solidify the rule of law and endurance of its institutions?
  - Twixes 7y ago
    Turkey did not survive a coup, Erdogan survived a "coup"
  - jupp0r 7y ago
    Your premise of democracy is wrong. Turkey is an authoritarian dictatorship at this point.
    - eeZah7Ux 7y ago
      ...and the US is shockingly close to being one.
      - colejohnson66 7y ago

seunosewa 7y ago

The article was masterfully framed to make us feel outraged by Google’s exercise of its right to chose where it does business. When Google pulls out of a country, it loses a lot, and so does the country. This is a strong incentive for both parties to be reasonable. Forcing Google to obey every government in the world doesn’t seem fair; many countries have unreasonable or evil laws.

black_puppydog 7y ago
OTOH: forcing every country in the world to obey google is no better.
- hartator 7y ago
  It is. Google hasn’t killed anyone so far that disagrees with them. Plenty of governments does.
  - bayindirh 7y ago
    No, it’s not. We didn’t give Microsoft a free pass when they did monopolistic moves. Google should not be treated differently.
    - dahfizz 7y ago
      You're moving the goalposts. The comment above yours says (and quite rightly) that Google does not have the power of a government and shouldn't be considered as such. And your response is "but Microsoft!".
      - bayindirh 7y ago
        Thanks for your answer. Sorry, it was not intentional. I'll try to explain myself better. In today's world, some of the corporations size and influence allows them to behave the way the want and, I see this as problematic. Google may not be killing anyone who disagrees with them and, they can freely decide where to conduct business. I have no problem with these points. However, I see Google's behavior as problematic. Google's response dşffers from country to country. They have a similar problem in EU (more specifically European Economic Area) and, they have implemented a selection screen similar to Microsoft's browser & search engine selection screen. Turkey might not be in EU but, as a country it has every right to level the playing field for the companies (in this case Yandex and Google) in order to increase the competition. The but Microsoft! response is coming from the change of tone in response to this issue. When Microsoft became the monopoly and pushed Sun Microsystems and other browsers around, the unanimous vote was to divide or somewhat stop them. When Google does a similar thing, response changes with respect to country which Google has a dispute. I find this wrong. P.S.: I'm a bit tired and English is not my native language. If I messed the writing, please point it out. I'll try to clarify.

Jonnax 7y ago

This story is about Google not wanting to have a browser choice screen for the bundled Chrome application to give a choice of either Yandex or Google search??? It doesn't sound that's all there is here. Perhaps a Yandex app store? Or perhaps this is about data residency? But also the author here is arguing that Android is a state asset and the choice to restrict usage to a country is the job of the government. Seems like a silly idea to me.

stevespang 7y ago

Awesome read, Matt.

qtplatypus 7y ago

I’ve just read the Reuters story that is linked. The Turkish government said that they were not legally permitted to sell phones with the current contract; so Google stopped selling an illegal product until they could resolve the issue. If Google kept selling the phones without resolving the issue then they would be subject to fines. How is complying with local laws a Dangerous Foreign Policy act?

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
Kalium 7y ago
> “We’ve informed our business partners that we will not be able to work with them on new Android phones to be released for the Turkish market,” the Google statement said. The article also says that Google won't be working with their business partners on new phones. The article spins this as demanding to "work with" Turkey, which strikes me as an overstatement in service of the argument that Google is discriminating against smaller countries. The author does seem to believe that Google should be compelled to do a maximum amount of business in every possible market until the State Department steps in. It's the authors contention that doing less than this is a Dangerous Foreign Policy Act.
nebulous1 7y ago
Well, it says Google were informed of this in 2018, and that the hammer didn't come down until late 2019. I think it's fair to say that Google intend to stop dealing with Turkey rather than comply with the local law, they're not temporarily pulling their products while they "resolve the issue". Whether or not you see this as merely a company pulling out of a market where they don't like the regulations or a Dangerous Foreign Policy is another question. I assume that the author sees is as the latter due to Google's immense size and power.

whack 7y ago

TLDR: Turkey wanted to regulate Google's activities in the Turkish market, and so, Google decided to exit the Turkish market entirely. I'm all in favor of vigorous anti-trust enforcement, and I think the Turkish regulators did the right thing. American/European regulators can probably take some pages out of their playbook. But it seems ridiculous to blame a company for choosing which markets it wants to do business in.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

steelframe 7y ago

Ah, it's so nice to have my morning coffee with my daily fresh anti-Google story on the front page of Hacker News. Our lives just wouldn't be the same without it.

ggambetta 7y ago
Yeah, I don't get it. FB is being openly evil with the political ads thing, but Google is the devil somehow? I suspect a smear campaign.
- kevingadd 7y ago
  Two things can be different and still both be bad. Are you claiming everyone on HN loves FB and hates Google? Because that is a pretty strong claim to make. Same goes for the tech press in general, it's not hard to find negative articles about FB and Google on the same website or from the same source. If you type "matt stoller facebook" into Google Search (the devil's search engine) one of the top results on the first page is a criticism of Facebook... by Matt Stoller: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/22/restructure-facebook-ftc-regulate-9-steps-now https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/22/restru... If you're going to suspect a smear campaign or conspiracy that's fine, but please at least make a basic effort to validate your theory before posting it on HN
  - gundmc 7y ago
    OP was talking about what gets upvoted to the front page of HN, not necessarily what gets written by the source. Try searching "Matt Stoller Facebook" and then "Matt Stoller Google" on HN.
netwanderer3 7y ago
It almost feels like there is an active campaign against them at this point. There used to be a smear campaign against Google which was orchestrated by Facebook a while ago, around the time when Cambridge Analytica scandal was discovered, just to take the heat off themselves. It is difficult to guess who is behind this new campaign.

KirinDave 7y ago

If ever there was a moment where a good open source phone OS as GUI toolkit could break onto the market, that time is now.

netwanderer3 7y ago

On paper, this is not really wrong. You can't force a shop owner to sell his products to you if he doesn't want to. Similarly, I just don't have the rights in forcing you to sell your house to me. I'm sure services like Netflix or Disney Plus are probably still not available in some countries. If you visit their website from those places, you would likely get a service denial message. It's within Google's rights to offer/withdraw their services to any places they wish. Having said that, maybe there was a better solution they could have implemented instead. Something like this should only be the very last choice on the list after exhausting all other options.

lucb1e 7y ago
> You can't force a shop owner to sell his products to you if he doesn't want to. The very first article of the Dutch constitution actually says that people have to be treated equally in equal cases. If you live in a country with a similar principle, do you know how this works with someone refusing to do business with you? If they sell to your peer, wouldn't they have to have a reason for not selling to you (i.e. to indicate that the case is unequal)? A reason like creditworthiness or "looking like you won't pay the bill" may or may not be sufficient, I'm not questioning which reasons may be used. I'm just wondering if it's true that a shop can indeed refuse someone for no reason at all. For those who are curious about the phrasing, source (in Dutch unfortunately): https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001840/2018-12-21 https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0001840/2018-12-21
- pdonis 7y ago
  > The very first article of the Dutch constitution actually says that people have to be treated equally in equal cases. Is that supposed to apply to the Dutch government? Or to everyone? Constitutions normally say what the government can and can't do; they don't normally directly tell ordinary citizens what they can and can't do.
  - bryanrasmussen 7y ago
    Are you sure what is normative for Constitutions? I suppose in this case normally just means in most cases.

bradj 7y ago

I don't see how this is a controversy. Turkey made a legal judgement, and Google decided the cost of compliance was too high so instead of thwarting the law and risk legal liability they retreated from the country. The threat of Monopoly by Google in Turkey is gone - so congrats? You shouldn't force a company to provide you the opportunity to by their product (outside of certain circumstances regarding protected classes in the US).

DERRICKBRIAN 7y ago

IF YOU WANTS TO JOIN ILLUMINATE BROTHER HOOD MAKE SURE YOU'RE LOYAL AND SERIOUS MINDED INDIVIDUAL. I wanna give a concise testimony of how I became rich and famous Read and pay keen interest..... We all underestimate the opportunity that comes across us in life, waking up to see a testimony like this is a blessing no man can pay for. Ten years ago, I feed from hand to mouth but today am a bonafide member of ILLUMINATE BROTHER HOOD, it's a dream come true. Back before I got initiated, I have always been curious to join the hood until I came across a testimony online about the illuminate and I decided to make a bold step by following its instructions, lol and behold am a proud member of the hood and ready to help whosoever that's willing to join the hood. Before I left you with the link , let me quickly drop you a tips of your benefits as a new member of the hood. Regardless of your professions, the hood will stand firm and support you with it, all that is expected of you, is your loyalty. And after your initiation, you will be awarded immediately with your benefits such as you desired, that's is to say , the illuminate hood gives benefits according to your wish and desires. As a matter of fact, the hood always welcome, serious and loyal new members that wants to join. So therefore, make sure you're interested before you emails us at initiationhoodofilluminate@gmail.com but you can still call the office line on +1(202) 750-0111 for further information.

notSupplied 7y ago

Microsoft eventually caved, and put a "Browser Choice" popup in Windows. This was because the US was too big for MS to ignore. Here, we have a similar choice: Turkey wants Google to give users "Search Engine Choice", and because Turkey is relatively small of a market compared to Google's TAM, they decided they'd rather ignore than market than compromise, even though a compromise is probably the best outcome for users, for fair competition. I think the author is not talking about what Google has a right to do or not do, nor do any moral obligation to play in which field. The problem being highlighted here is that size simply matters too much.