4 ms·

So-called "break-up" may not be effective as expected and it's easy to workaround that for tech companies as they're less tied to physical infrastructures unlik

So-called "break-up" may not be effective as expected and it's easy to workaround that for tech companies as they're less tied to physical infrastructures unlike conventional monopolies. It's likely that they'll got billions of fine as well as be forced to implement corrective measures on their anti-competitive behaviors, of course if they lose.

riku_iki 3y ago
I think they very tied together because all google services run on the same internal infra and use shared collected data, and for example moving ads out of google and force them to pay market cloud prices, deal with all bugs and complexity other market players are facing and more importantly cut from data collected internally at google will produce significant damage on them.
- summerlight 3y ago
  There is no good way to prevent a proposed "G Infra" and other broken up entities such as "G Ads", "G Search", etc etc to make a preferential deal to share the infrastructure since "G Infra" has never been a monopoly in the market. If you want to do that, you gotta go through another multi-year legal fights which is destined to fail. You might be able to prevent "G Search" from doing some anti-competitive stuff, but at the point it's not that different from just forcing corrective measures except breaking up is a much harder, risky and time consuming goal. Breaking up based on geographic location worked well for conventional monopoly because those companies were usually organized in a geographically cohesive way and they don't have good incentives to form another cartel across the continent. For Google, it's already structured in a way to reinforce network effects in every way, so this is a completely different story. The right approach to tackle this problem is a more pin-pointed regulation, such as DMA. EU is doing the right thing for those big techs while the US is wasting its precious time and energy.

riku_iki 3y ago

I think they very tied together because all google services run on the same internal infra and use shared collected data, and for example moving ads out of google and force them to pay market cloud prices, deal with all bugs and complexity other market players are facing and more importantly cut from data collected internally at google will produce significant damage on them.

summerlight 3y ago
There is no good way to prevent a proposed "G Infra" and other broken up entities such as "G Ads", "G Search", etc etc to make a preferential deal to share the infrastructure since "G Infra" has never been a monopoly in the market. If you want to do that, you gotta go through another multi-year legal fights which is destined to fail. You might be able to prevent "G Search" from doing some anti-competitive stuff, but at the point it's not that different from just forcing corrective measures except breaking up is a much harder, risky and time consuming goal. Breaking up based on geographic location worked well for conventional monopoly because those companies were usually organized in a geographically cohesive way and they don't have good incentives to form another cartel across the continent. For Google, it's already structured in a way to reinforce network effects in every way, so this is a completely different story. The right approach to tackle this problem is a more pin-pointed regulation, such as DMA. EU is doing the right thing for those big techs while the US is wasting its precious time and energy.