3 ms·

What do you call it when a company makes a change to its product in one market where it has large market share that drives its competitors in another market out

by IX-103 5y ago

What do you call it when a company makes a change to its product in one market where it has large market share that drives its competitors in another market out if business? Or put another way, do you really think Google could get rid of third party cookies tomorrow and not get sued out existence? IANAL, but even I can see that making changes to Chrome that impact advertising is risky even if you ignore Google's own advertising interests. So far they're trying to push things along, but they need buy-in from most of the rest of the advertising industry before they feel they can do anything too radical. So as far as Google is concerned the elimination of third party cookies (and bounce tracking protection, browser fingerprinting, etc) is definitively tied to something that replaces it. One of those things is FLOC.

raxxorrax 5y ago
> could get rid of third party cookies tomorrow and not get sued out existence? I don't think people abusing cookies have a standing as I see it. On what grounds, that their predatory business model is obsolete? On the contrary, even if many web services are financed by ads, most customers of advertising just care about having the same possibilities to advertise their products. So a more healthy ad world would remain. "Legal" advertising has eclipsed spam with its toxicity.
pitdicker 5y ago
> do you really think Google could get rid of third party cookies tomorrow and not get sued out existence? Not disagreeing, but ad companies attempting to sue Google out of existence would be worth watching.
- IX-103 5y ago
  The trick is the ad companies can use anti-trust to get the governments of the world to foot the bill. See the recent issue with the CMA in the UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-to-have-key-oversight-role-over-google-s-planned-removal-of-third-party-cookies https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-to-have-key-oversight...
Farow 5y ago
> do you really think Google could get rid of third party cookies tomorrow and not get sued out existence? Considering that ad blocking extensions still exist, yes. The browser (user agent) is supposed to act on the behalf of the user, not the remote server. It's not required to use cookies, display ads or run malicious code. On what grounds would an ad company sue Google for a change in Chromium that enhances the user's privacy, while they can still display ads (just not track the users as much)?
- IX-103 5y ago
  Look, you can go into Chrome today and disable third party cookies via a setting. There may be a way to create an extension that does this change automatically. Almost anyone other than Google can make this change without major legal worries, but because Google is in both the ads market and a browser vendor they can't rock the boat. On what grounds? There are businesses whose only product is targeting information for ads. If they can't get the data they need then they can't produce a product and will go out of business. Hopefully Mozilla and Apple can start pushing some of the tracking replacement technologies since they don't have their hands tied like Google.

by IX-103 5y ago

raxxorrax 5y ago

> could get rid of third party cookies tomorrow and not get sued out existence? I don't think people abusing cookies have a standing as I see it. On what grounds, that their predatory business model is obsolete? On the contrary, even if many web services are financed by ads, most customers of advertising just care about having the same possibilities to advertise their products. So a more healthy ad world would remain. "Legal" advertising has eclipsed spam with its toxicity.

pitdicker 5y ago

> do you really think Google could get rid of third party cookies tomorrow and not get sued out existence? Not disagreeing, but ad companies attempting to sue Google out of existence would be worth watching.

IX-103 5y ago
The trick is the ad companies can use anti-trust to get the governments of the world to foot the bill. See the recent issue with the CMA in the UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-to-have-key-oversight-role-over-google-s-planned-removal-of-third-party-cookies https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-to-have-key-oversight...

Farow 5y ago

> do you really think Google could get rid of third party cookies tomorrow and not get sued out existence? Considering that ad blocking extensions still exist, yes. The browser (user agent) is supposed to act on the behalf of the user, not the remote server. It's not required to use cookies, display ads or run malicious code. On what grounds would an ad company sue Google for a change in Chromium that enhances the user's privacy, while they can still display ads (just not track the users as much)?

IX-103 5y ago
Look, you can go into Chrome today and disable third party cookies via a setting. There may be a way to create an extension that does this change automatically. Almost anyone other than Google can make this change without major legal worries, but because Google is in both the ads market and a browser vendor they can't rock the boat. On what grounds? There are businesses whose only product is targeting information for ads. If they can't get the data they need then they can't produce a product and will go out of business. Hopefully Mozilla and Apple can start pushing some of the tracking replacement technologies since they don't have their hands tied like Google.