7 ms·

U.S. v. Google

59 points by skilled 3y ago

skilled 3y ago
https://archive.ph/cUBoC https://archive.ph/cUBoC E: NYTimes has a live feed up now[0] but unfortunately it is paywalled. You can bypass it by disabling JS and then refreshing once in a while if you want to keep up. I don't see BBC or The Guardian running a live feed, but if there's a better (non-paywalled) link then comment below. [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/09/12/business/google-antitrust-trial https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/09/12/business/google-anti...
bilal4hmed 3y ago
This will be a good one to watch. If the government wins, Apple and Mozilla might also be on the losing side here and for Mozilla itll pretty much be the end. Might be the kick in the pants FF needs to figure out funding, otherwise a plus for web devs who now need to worry about just 2 rendering engines.
- westcoalst 3y ago
  > This will be a good one to watch. An equivalent of a trip to the theatre.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Matt Stoller has spun up a small initiative and is paying a reporter specifically to attend the trial in person if you want to follow along. https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/big-tech-on-trial-how-big-will-be https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/big-tech-on-trial-how-big... https://www.bigtechontrial.com/ https://www.bigtechontrial.com/ (financial supporter of both his BIG newsletter and big tech on trial, no other relation)
  - op00to 3y ago
    FWIW the "www.bigtechontrial.com" domain does not work for me.
    - greenyoda 3y ago
      Works OK for me. It goes to another Substack site.
      - op00to 3y ago
        Works good now - before it redirected to a register.com holding site!
- throwoutway 3y ago
  > Might be the kick in the pants FF needs to figure out funding, First they need to stop wasting money on silly side projects and funding activists and political activities
  - bilal4hmed 3y ago
    they will have to stop if $500 mn in payments stop....they might have to stop altogether lol
  - tristan957 3y ago
    You are mixing up the Mozilla Corporation and the Mozilla Foundation.
    - throwoutway 3y ago
      Which one can I donate to that will spend the money on only FF and nothing else? The foundation shouldn't be wasting money throwing activist festivals like this https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/announcing-activists-mozfest-2023/ https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/announcing-activists-...
      - tristan957 3y ago
        Neither
wslh 3y ago
Do you think they have added more tracking in Google Chrome to use time as the last bullet/opportunity to gain more information about users?
hospitalJail 3y ago
I have so many mixed feelings about Google. They unlike the fruit company, advanced society sooo far with their FOSS. I have sooo many degoogled products, and I need to give them credit for that. They also refused to comply with the CCP, something the fruit company was happy to do during the hong kong protests. They even continue to let ad blockers on their platforms. They also made it easy for a poor college kid to make apps, unlike the fruit company. But... They also suck. Canceling services, no customer service, removing the aux port to sell headphones, etc... They aren't the same company I was a fan of a decade or two ago. Not sure what I want out of this. While it seems like I'm taking Ls from all the FAAMG companies, I admittedly think my life has never been better from a tech point of view. (most of that is from GPT and Moore's law though)
- edgyquant 3y ago
  Even if they were the greatest company on the planet that doesn’t change that they dominate the ad market and internet and that has to change
  - inductive_magic 3y ago
    I wish more people understood how horrible advertising truly is. Your life is essentially a compilation of what captures your attention. Embracing this perspective, any entity auctioning off your attention to the highest bidder is trading away a part of your life. People don't understand what this means. They also don't understand how cynical this is in the context of a search engine. I don't have a solution to this, but man, its horrible.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      This is a bit much. Attention is not that hard to control if you want to. It's sad if people allow their attention to be captured by doomscrolling/notification-clearing/etc but no more so than if they did so playing Solitaire or reading trashy magazines.
      - 3y ago
f33d5173 3y ago
I'm all in fabour of anti trust against google, but this really doesn't seem like the way. Any other company can easily pony up the cash to become the default search engine, if they'd like. Yahoo gave it a pass on firefox a few years back. All it costs is money. On android, they seemingly don't abuse their ownership of the platform there to maintain their search monopoly: the complaint is about a special search specific deal like everywhere else.
- arijun 3y ago
  But why couldn't that be a monopolistic practice? For example, let’s say Apple is getting more than 100% of the ad revenue Google earns from iPhones, but it’s still worth it for Google only because it doesn’t have iPhone users start thinking about other search engines (thereby maintaining the monopoly). That seems pretty similar to standard oil pricing below market value to get its competitors out of business.
  - reaperman 3y ago
    > That seems pretty similar to standard oil pricing below market value to get its competitors out of business. Not quite. In economic terms, if: > Apple is getting more than 100% of the ad revenue Google earns from iPhones This would mean that Google is pricing it not just "below market value", but also "below marginal cost of production". You can price below market value and still make a small profit. But in your hypothetical it's literally bleeding money. I don't think it invalidates your point that "it could qualify as a monopolistic practice". But it's an important distinction because generally selling your goods/services below the supplier's marginal cost is inherently unsustainable.
  - yetanotherasian 3y ago
    Playing for placement is common (not saying it's right, nor am I saying it's wrong) https://thecounter.org/coca-cola-frito-lay-mars-real-estate-grocery-stores-end-cap-trade-promotions/ https://thecounter.org/coca-cola-frito-lay-mars-real-estate-... https://www.vox.com/2016/11/22/13707022/grocery-store-slotting-fees-slotting-allowances https://www.vox.com/2016/11/22/13707022/grocery-store-slotti...
havnagiggle 3y ago
> other companies such as Microsoft can’t perform enough searches to improve their product Big belly laugh at this. Literally a boohoo moment. Apple, et. al. are going to throw MS a bone or something? Shitty products don't "deserve" anything IMO. What was OpenAI able to achieve without having 90% dominance in the ad space market? Anti-competitiveness is still a problem so Google will have a hell of a battle ahead. I am curious what MSFT's stock did in the different phases of their antitrust suit.
cracauer 3y ago
This is bad in one aspect: Google pays Mozilla a lot of money, mainly to keep Google search the default search engine in Firefox. If that turns out to be illegal it could create a financial crisis for the Firefox browser and hence reduce diversity in web browsers.
- convolvatron 3y ago
  this is true. but wouldn't it be nice everything didn't have to flow through google and could exist on its own merits? infrastructure like browsers should really be neutral ground - its sad we can't figure out a way to fund things like that
  - gjsman-1000 3y ago
    At the same time though, when's the last time any of us donated to open source? I can count myself within the last month... but many will admit that they have never run "npm fund" once.
    - tristan957 3y ago
      FWIW, you can't donate to Firefox development.
  - nabakin 3y ago
    It would be nice, but it's not realistic. If Google's revenue disappears, then unless Mozilla finds some other form of revenue (which they've been trying to do for years now), Firefox is done for.
- ocdtrekkie 3y ago
  If Firefox loses a lot of funding but Google loses the ability to pay companies to make Chrome the default on nearly all devices sold globally today, Firefox will be in much better shape than it is now. Google is killing it, and also giving it a few dollars.
  - 3y ago
ColinHayhurst 3y ago
The <blanks> behind the pre-trial briefs redactions will tell a lot. Some here, more detail in this thread [0]. 1. Google’s <blank> with <blank> prevents <blank> from pre-setting a different, more private search engine (e.g., <blank>) as its default [blank]. 2. Google's partners-including OEMS, carriers, and Apple-wanted more flexibility than what they ultimately received under their contracts with Google. In particular, <blank> bristled repeatedly at the <blank> restrictive nature ..... For example, in <blank>, <blank> sought to offer <blank>. Google refused. 3. Browsers also took issue with Google’s restrictive terms. For example, <blank> sought an alternative to Google and signed a contract with <blank> to encourage competition in search, welcoming the <blank> to <blank>. However, the trial testimony will show that to win the <blank> default from Google in 2014, <blank> needed to offer a <blank> million annual financial guarantee—roughly <blank> million more than Google was paying for the <blank> default. <blank> [0] https://twitter.com/ColinHayhurst/status/1701274277830357164 https://twitter.com/ColinHayhurst/status/1701274277830357164
- jcranmer 3y ago
  > 3. Browsers also took issue with Google’s restrictive terms. For example, <blank> sought an alternative to Google and signed a contract with <blank> to encourage competition in search, welcoming the <blank> to <blank>. However, the trial testimony will show that to win the <blank> default from Google in 2014, <blank> needed to offer a <blank> million annual financial guarantee—roughly <blank> million more than Google was paying for the <blank> default. <blank> That's an interesting thing to redact because... there's new articles from the time about some of these details. (This is almost certainly Mozilla switching the default search engine in Firefox, see https://techcrunch.com/2014/11/19/mozilla-partners-with-yahoo-which-will-become-the-default-search-engine-in-firefox-next-month/ https://techcrunch.com/2014/11/19/mozilla-partners-with-yaho...). The only thing that I'm not sure about is the precise monetary value was, or what the last <blank> (a full sentence, complete with a footnote attached).
trinsic2 3y ago
What about Microsoft? It seems like they're in a way worse position for from an antitrust perspective.

59 points by skilled 3y ago

https://archive.ph/cUBoC https://archive.ph/cUBoC E: NYTimes has a live feed up now[0] but unfortunately it is paywalled. You can bypass it by disabling JS and then refreshing once in a while if you want to keep up. I don't see BBC or The Guardian running a live feed, but if there's a better (non-paywalled) link then comment below. [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/09/12/business/google-antitrust-trial https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/09/12/business/google-anti...

bilal4hmed 3y ago

This will be a good one to watch. If the government wins, Apple and Mozilla might also be on the losing side here and for Mozilla itll pretty much be the end. Might be the kick in the pants FF needs to figure out funding, otherwise a plus for web devs who now need to worry about just 2 rendering engines.

westcoalst 3y ago
> This will be a good one to watch. An equivalent of a trip to the theatre.
toomuchtodo 3y ago
Matt Stoller has spun up a small initiative and is paying a reporter specifically to attend the trial in person if you want to follow along. https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/big-tech-on-trial-how-big-will-be https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/big-tech-on-trial-how-big... https://www.bigtechontrial.com/ https://www.bigtechontrial.com/ (financial supporter of both his BIG newsletter and big tech on trial, no other relation)
- op00to 3y ago
  FWIW the "www.bigtechontrial.com" domain does not work for me.
  - greenyoda 3y ago
    Works OK for me. It goes to another Substack site.
    - op00to 3y ago
      Works good now - before it redirected to a register.com holding site!
throwoutway 3y ago
> Might be the kick in the pants FF needs to figure out funding, First they need to stop wasting money on silly side projects and funding activists and political activities
- bilal4hmed 3y ago
  they will have to stop if $500 mn in payments stop....they might have to stop altogether lol
- tristan957 3y ago
  You are mixing up the Mozilla Corporation and the Mozilla Foundation.
  - throwoutway 3y ago
    Which one can I donate to that will spend the money on only FF and nothing else? The foundation shouldn't be wasting money throwing activist festivals like this https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/announcing-activists-mozfest-2023/ https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/blog/announcing-activists-...
    - tristan957 3y ago
      Neither

wslh 3y ago

Do you think they have added more tracking in Google Chrome to use time as the last bullet/opportunity to gain more information about users?

hospitalJail 3y ago

I have so many mixed feelings about Google. They unlike the fruit company, advanced society sooo far with their FOSS. I have sooo many degoogled products, and I need to give them credit for that. They also refused to comply with the CCP, something the fruit company was happy to do during the hong kong protests. They even continue to let ad blockers on their platforms. They also made it easy for a poor college kid to make apps, unlike the fruit company. But... They also suck. Canceling services, no customer service, removing the aux port to sell headphones, etc... They aren't the same company I was a fan of a decade or two ago. Not sure what I want out of this. While it seems like I'm taking Ls from all the FAAMG companies, I admittedly think my life has never been better from a tech point of view. (most of that is from GPT and Moore's law though)

edgyquant 3y ago
Even if they were the greatest company on the planet that doesn’t change that they dominate the ad market and internet and that has to change
- inductive_magic 3y ago
  I wish more people understood how horrible advertising truly is. Your life is essentially a compilation of what captures your attention. Embracing this perspective, any entity auctioning off your attention to the highest bidder is trading away a part of your life. People don't understand what this means. They also don't understand how cynical this is in the context of a search engine. I don't have a solution to this, but man, its horrible.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    This is a bit much. Attention is not that hard to control if you want to. It's sad if people allow their attention to be captured by doomscrolling/notification-clearing/etc but no more so than if they did so playing Solitaire or reading trashy magazines.
    - 3y ago

f33d5173 3y ago

I'm all in fabour of anti trust against google, but this really doesn't seem like the way. Any other company can easily pony up the cash to become the default search engine, if they'd like. Yahoo gave it a pass on firefox a few years back. All it costs is money. On android, they seemingly don't abuse their ownership of the platform there to maintain their search monopoly: the complaint is about a special search specific deal like everywhere else.

arijun 3y ago
But why couldn't that be a monopolistic practice? For example, let’s say Apple is getting more than 100% of the ad revenue Google earns from iPhones, but it’s still worth it for Google only because it doesn’t have iPhone users start thinking about other search engines (thereby maintaining the monopoly). That seems pretty similar to standard oil pricing below market value to get its competitors out of business.
- reaperman 3y ago
  > That seems pretty similar to standard oil pricing below market value to get its competitors out of business. Not quite. In economic terms, if: > Apple is getting more than 100% of the ad revenue Google earns from iPhones This would mean that Google is pricing it not just "below market value", but also "below marginal cost of production". You can price below market value and still make a small profit. But in your hypothetical it's literally bleeding money. I don't think it invalidates your point that "it could qualify as a monopolistic practice". But it's an important distinction because generally selling your goods/services below the supplier's marginal cost is inherently unsustainable.
- yetanotherasian 3y ago
  Playing for placement is common (not saying it's right, nor am I saying it's wrong) https://thecounter.org/coca-cola-frito-lay-mars-real-estate-grocery-stores-end-cap-trade-promotions/ https://thecounter.org/coca-cola-frito-lay-mars-real-estate-... https://www.vox.com/2016/11/22/13707022/grocery-store-slotting-fees-slotting-allowances https://www.vox.com/2016/11/22/13707022/grocery-store-slotti...

havnagiggle 3y ago

> other companies such as Microsoft can’t perform enough searches to improve their product Big belly laugh at this. Literally a boohoo moment. Apple, et. al. are going to throw MS a bone or something? Shitty products don't "deserve" anything IMO. What was OpenAI able to achieve without having 90% dominance in the ad space market? Anti-competitiveness is still a problem so Google will have a hell of a battle ahead. I am curious what MSFT's stock did in the different phases of their antitrust suit.

cracauer 3y ago

This is bad in one aspect: Google pays Mozilla a lot of money, mainly to keep Google search the default search engine in Firefox. If that turns out to be illegal it could create a financial crisis for the Firefox browser and hence reduce diversity in web browsers.

convolvatron 3y ago
this is true. but wouldn't it be nice everything didn't have to flow through google and could exist on its own merits? infrastructure like browsers should really be neutral ground - its sad we can't figure out a way to fund things like that
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  At the same time though, when's the last time any of us donated to open source? I can count myself within the last month... but many will admit that they have never run "npm fund" once.
  - tristan957 3y ago
    FWIW, you can't donate to Firefox development.
- nabakin 3y ago
  It would be nice, but it's not realistic. If Google's revenue disappears, then unless Mozilla finds some other form of revenue (which they've been trying to do for years now), Firefox is done for.
ocdtrekkie 3y ago
If Firefox loses a lot of funding but Google loses the ability to pay companies to make Chrome the default on nearly all devices sold globally today, Firefox will be in much better shape than it is now. Google is killing it, and also giving it a few dollars.
- 3y ago

ColinHayhurst 3y ago

The <blanks> behind the pre-trial briefs redactions will tell a lot. Some here, more detail in this thread [0]. 1. Google’s <blank> with <blank> prevents <blank> from pre-setting a different, more private search engine (e.g., <blank>) as its default [blank]. 2. Google's partners-including OEMS, carriers, and Apple-wanted more flexibility than what they ultimately received under their contracts with Google. In particular, <blank> bristled repeatedly at the <blank> restrictive nature ..... For example, in <blank>, <blank> sought to offer <blank>. Google refused. 3. Browsers also took issue with Google’s restrictive terms. For example, <blank> sought an alternative to Google and signed a contract with <blank> to encourage competition in search, welcoming the <blank> to <blank>. However, the trial testimony will show that to win the <blank> default from Google in 2014, <blank> needed to offer a <blank> million annual financial guarantee—roughly <blank> million more than Google was paying for the <blank> default. <blank> [0] https://twitter.com/ColinHayhurst/status/1701274277830357164 https://twitter.com/ColinHayhurst/status/1701274277830357164

jcranmer 3y ago
> 3. Browsers also took issue with Google’s restrictive terms. For example, <blank> sought an alternative to Google and signed a contract with <blank> to encourage competition in search, welcoming the <blank> to <blank>. However, the trial testimony will show that to win the <blank> default from Google in 2014, <blank> needed to offer a <blank> million annual financial guarantee—roughly <blank> million more than Google was paying for the <blank> default. <blank> That's an interesting thing to redact because... there's new articles from the time about some of these details. (This is almost certainly Mozilla switching the default search engine in Firefox, see https://techcrunch.com/2014/11/19/mozilla-partners-with-yahoo-which-will-become-the-default-search-engine-in-firefox-next-month/ https://techcrunch.com/2014/11/19/mozilla-partners-with-yaho...). The only thing that I'm not sure about is the precise monetary value was, or what the last <blank> (a full sentence, complete with a footnote attached).

trinsic2 3y ago

What about Microsoft? It seems like they're in a way worse position for from an antitrust perspective.