6 ms·

The evidence of collusion between Apple and Google coming out of the Epic case is amazing to me. I'd always thought it was a sort of unspoken "game theoretic" t

The evidence of collusion between Apple and Google coming out of the Epic case is amazing to me. I'd always thought it was a sort of unspoken "game theoretic" type of collusion (which I'm sure it is in part), but it looks like they've had very explicit communication about it: https://mobile.twitter.com/jowens510/status/1428417681351348224 https://mobile.twitter.com/jowens510/status/1428417681351348... > After another meeting between Apple and Google senior executives, notes showed that the execs agreed: "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." Just incredible.

_cs2017_ 5y ago
While it makes an awesome headline for a tabloid or HackerNews, it's not necessarily imporant. See comments on Reddit that provide some thoughts on that: https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w5sfg/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w7m8x/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... Obviously, I don't claim these two comments are correct. I do claim, however, that people are better served by not quoting random statements from a lawsuit without understanding either the context or the applicable law. Especially when only one side in the lawsuit is quoted from.
- elliekelly 5y ago
  Those Redditors don’t know what they’re talking about. Documented evidence of two competing companies agreeing to “operate as one” is absolutely damning in an antitrust trial. There’s almost no context that could be given to make that statement not damning unless it turns out this was some sort of antitrust training seminar put on by the legal department and it was given as an example of what not to say when you’re giving the opportunity to collude with the competition.
  - _cs2017_ 5y ago
    By "damning", do you mean that the quote alone is obviously sufficient to materially tip the scales in favor of the government should the antitrust lawsuit occur? If so, what is your best guess as to why the executives (who surely know that) might have chosen to use those words?
Gibbon1 5y ago
> "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." Personal feeling after the whole salary fixing case and now this, Google should be forced to move it's head quarters and it's top management to some place like Waco Texas.
- kortilla 5y ago
  These people use the Internet and cell phones.
- kwertyoowiyop 5y ago
  The Eighth Amendment forbids “cruel and unusual” punishment.
oldgradstudent 5y ago
>I'd always thought it was a sort of unspoken "game theoretic" type of collusion (which I'm sure it is in part), but it looks like they've had very explicit communication about it: Why would you even think that after the whole salary fixing scandal? There's no enforcement of antitrust law and no incentive not to collude freely and egregiously. Had Eric Schmidt, Steve Jobs, George Lucas, Paul Otellini, and everyone else directly involved in the wage fixing scandal, spent a year in federal prison per violation, the situation might have been different.
- rewq4321 5y ago
  Fair point!
- rightbyte 5y ago
  Is fixing wages illegal, like price fixing?
  - aaaaaaaaaaab 5y ago
    It violates federal antitrust law.
  - ClumsyPilot 5y ago
    Do we have law and order?
  - Frost1x 5y ago
    If it's not it should be. You can't push free markets for everyone else then controlled markets for yourself (I mean you can, but it's hypocrisy). I'm tired of the double standards businesses and the capital ownership class have.
    - noasaservice 5y ago
      "If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class." -Final Fantasy Tactics
kzrdude 5y ago
Incredible that they would allow something like that to be recorded in writing! Apparently they are not even afraid of antitrust laws, judging by that.
- deeter72 5y ago
  This reminds a scene from the TV show, the wire when one of the main criminal character hosts a meeting with other gang leaders and a member of his gang is recording minutes, the main character says "Are you taking notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy?". Apparently none of the intelligent executives at Apple/Google figured this out.

_cs2017_ 5y ago

While it makes an awesome headline for a tabloid or HackerNews, it's not necessarily imporant. See comments on Reddit that provide some thoughts on that: https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w5sfg/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another_meeting_between_apple_and_google/h9w7m8x/ https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/p970st/after_another... Obviously, I don't claim these two comments are correct. I do claim, however, that people are better served by not quoting random statements from a lawsuit without understanding either the context or the applicable law. Especially when only one side in the lawsuit is quoted from.

elliekelly 5y ago
Those Redditors don’t know what they’re talking about. Documented evidence of two competing companies agreeing to “operate as one” is absolutely damning in an antitrust trial. There’s almost no context that could be given to make that statement not damning unless it turns out this was some sort of antitrust training seminar put on by the legal department and it was given as an example of what not to say when you’re giving the opportunity to collude with the competition.
- _cs2017_ 5y ago
  By "damning", do you mean that the quote alone is obviously sufficient to materially tip the scales in favor of the government should the antitrust lawsuit occur? If so, what is your best guess as to why the executives (who surely know that) might have chosen to use those words?

Gibbon1 5y ago

> "Our vision is that we work as if we are one company." Personal feeling after the whole salary fixing case and now this, Google should be forced to move it's head quarters and it's top management to some place like Waco Texas.

kortilla 5y ago
These people use the Internet and cell phones.
kwertyoowiyop 5y ago
The Eighth Amendment forbids “cruel and unusual” punishment.

oldgradstudent 5y ago

>I'd always thought it was a sort of unspoken "game theoretic" type of collusion (which I'm sure it is in part), but it looks like they've had very explicit communication about it: Why would you even think that after the whole salary fixing scandal? There's no enforcement of antitrust law and no incentive not to collude freely and egregiously. Had Eric Schmidt, Steve Jobs, George Lucas, Paul Otellini, and everyone else directly involved in the wage fixing scandal, spent a year in federal prison per violation, the situation might have been different.

rewq4321 5y ago
Fair point!
rightbyte 5y ago
Is fixing wages illegal, like price fixing?
- aaaaaaaaaaab 5y ago
  It violates federal antitrust law.
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  Do we have law and order?
- Frost1x 5y ago
  If it's not it should be. You can't push free markets for everyone else then controlled markets for yourself (I mean you can, but it's hypocrisy). I'm tired of the double standards businesses and the capital ownership class have.
  - noasaservice 5y ago
    "If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class." -Final Fantasy Tactics

kzrdude 5y ago

Incredible that they would allow something like that to be recorded in writing! Apparently they are not even afraid of antitrust laws, judging by that.

deeter72 5y ago
This reminds a scene from the TV show, the wire when one of the main criminal character hosts a meeting with other gang leaders and a member of his gang is recording minutes, the main character says "Are you taking notes on a criminal fucking conspiracy?". Apparently none of the intelligent executives at Apple/Google figured this out.