6 ms·

I never understood the antitrust angle towards Google search. Is there some kind of browser or app out there that is forcing people to use Google as their searc

I never understood the antitrust angle towards Google search. Is there some kind of browser or app out there that is forcing people to use Google as their search engine on all their devices?

ocdtrekkie 12y ago
The fact that most people use the default, and that Google mandates the browser be Chrome and the search be Google for all Chrome web browsers (largest desktop market share) and Android devices (largest mobile market share). And that they then prioritize their own products and services in Search as well. The issue isn't "everyone is forced to use Google Search" as much as "Google creates a monopoly through connected use of it's various products and services".
- mirashii 12y ago
  > and that Google mandates the browser be Chrome and the search be Google for all Chrome web browsers (largest desktop market share) and Android devices (largest mobile market share) No, they don't. You're free to use any browser on your desktop. You're free to use any browser on your Android device. And you're free to go into Chrome settings and use any search engine in Chrome on any of these devices.
  - digi_owl 12y ago
    And much the same could be argued about Microsoft and IE. Yet everyone but Google Chrome failed to overtake IE. Defaults are powerful things, as so very few take the time to change them.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - twrkit 12y ago
      Chrome overtook IE because it is (or at least at the time, was) a superior product.
      - digi_owl 12y ago
        And the same could be said about Firefox, yet it never happened. Damn it, since Firefox canceled their deal with Google the latter has taken to pitching Chrome whenever a Firefox user visits Google.com.
        ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        Are you even remotely surprised, digi_owl?
      - blumkvist 12y ago
        Yeah, an advertisement on the most popular web site in the world stating "Download the faster browser" has nothing to do with it, I'm sure.
        ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        Years of cleaning malware off Windows PCs has taught me that average users will click on anything that offers to make their computer faster.
      - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
        Only partly. Much was peer pressure. Much was Google's homepage selling it to you.
    - magicalist 12y ago
      > And much the same could be argued about Microsoft and IE. Yet everyone but Google Chrome failed to overtake IE. If you believe statcounter, Firefox is actually really really close to overtaking IE http://gs.statcounter.com/ http://gs.statcounter.com/
      - pmontra 12y ago
        In my part of the world (Europe) there has been a kind of triple point in March 2012 http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-eu-monthly-200807-201504 http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-eu-monthly-200807-201504 Chrome and FF overtook IE, then Chrome kept growing, FF and IE kept falling with FF maintaining an edge over IE.
  - DasIch 12y ago
    The fact that you are free to use a competitor has no relevance at all.
    - mirashii 12y ago
      Perhaps it doesn't in the antitrust case, but in the context of a response to a comment with false statements implying the opposite, it does.
  - gress 12y ago
    They do mandate that it be the default for Android devices.
    - Oletros 12y ago
      For Android devices with Google services
      - gress 12y ago
        Which is the vast majority of android devices sold outside China, and is exactly the kind of bundling that antitrust actions are interested in.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- linkregister 12y ago
  Not withstanding that Opera, Firefox, and other browsers are available in the Google Play store for android, you can easily change the default search in the Settings menu. The ease of this change can be compared to changing the default search in Internet Explorer or Safari. [1] [1] http://www.androidcentral.com/how-change-your-default-search-engine-chrome http://www.androidcentral.com/how-change-your-default-search...
  - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
    The fact that you can change it is irrelevant. Microsoft learned that the hard way. Most people will use the default.
    - Goronmon 12y ago
      But the landscape has changed quite a bit since the days of Microsoft bunding IE. Changing browsers and search engines is a trivial task nowadays. Plus, Microsoft's problems were tied to Windows with IE. It appears this is just about Search results and/or Chrome, as they outline Android specifically as something they are now investigating.
    - mirashii 12y ago
      It's less irrelevant when the OP used the particular phasing of "mandates", which is quite hyperbolic and doesn't actually forward the discussion, thus the corrections.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      > The fact that you can change it is irrelevant. Its not irrelevant; there is clearly a stronger case for anticompetitive behavior if you include an app as default with an OS and prevent alternatives than you if you provide a default but allow alternatives. OTOH, merely allowing alternatives may not be sufficient, depending on other circumstances, to not run afoul of competition laws in some jurisdictions.
- digi_owl 12y ago
  The "monopoly" word is irrelevant. It boils down to using a major market position (search) to leverage a position in another market. The whole hoopla about browser choice in Windows was for much the same, as Microsoft used their OS market position to push Internet Explorer, that in turn pushed IIS. Frankly the browser war was a proxy for intranet server competition. Netscape was trying to use internet tech to go after corporate networks, and MS was trying to cut them off at the pass. You don't need to be a monopoly to get slapped with antitrust. All that is needed is for you to be the big dog of the pack, and seen as abusing that position.
  - Goronmon 12y ago
    What's the "other market" in this case though?
    - erjiang 12y ago
      Flights. Mail. Cloud services. Office suite software. Etc. Imagine that you search for "orlando new york flight" and the first result is rigged to be Google Flight Search. Or you look for "cloud database" and Google Cloud SQL is first. Google is trying to get into a lot of markets, and its dominance in search could give its many other ventures an advantage.
      - Goronmon 12y ago
        I can see that perspective from one angle. But I still come back to the fact that it's trivially easy to not use Chrome or Google search. There is no barrier (such as cost or method of delivery like in the old days of the browser wars) to prevent a user from making the switch. And wouldn't this all be an issue for a company like Amazon as well? They are a marketplace, yet they also make tablets, e-readers, have a video-streaming service. Aren't they using their position as a online retailer to push their products in other markets over other company's products?
        ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        It was actually pretty trivially easy to install Netscape. It most certainly could affect Amazon. And I would be okay with that.
- Goronmon 12y ago
  The fact that most people use the default, and that Google mandates the browser be Chrome These charges aren't related to Android, so where is Google 'mandating' Chrome be used?
  - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
    The issue is that Google is default on Chrome. Their charges against Android are coming soon, they've launched an official investigation into Android app bundling as well.
    - Goronmon 12y ago
      The issue is that Google is default on Chrome. I'm not convinced that's an issue. A user has to specifically choose to down the Chrome browser for free. At which point it defaults to Google search, and you can trivially change it to use another search engine. The "issue" sounds really thin to me. Their charges against Android are coming soon, they've launched an official investigation into Android app bundling as well. So, what relevance does that have here then?
      - Karunamon 12y ago
        The "issue" with regard to the browser wars in 201x has always been thin. That idiotic "ballot" thing that European Windows users had to deal with? Yeah. God forbid a modern OS come with a web browser.
      - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        Extremely similar behavior. Basically the same premise, just a different division of the company doing it.
- soxpopuli 12y ago
  Google had over 80% of the market before Chrome was even released, and they achieved most of that with MSN Search being the default on Windows. The majority of Web users on the most used browser (IE) manually chose to use Google.
Brakenshire 12y ago
The article says > At issue is whether the company uses its position as the dominant search engine company to muscle out competition from specialized search services, specifically comparison shopping sites, by prioritizing its own Google Shopping search results. Where are you getting that the 'antitrust angle towards Google search' is a subject of the complaint?
- Goronmon 12y ago
  From the fact that it mentions Google's position as a dominant search engine company prioritizing it's own search results.
- Lazare 12y ago
  The sentence you quote is referring to antitrust. The laws about using a dominant position to compete unfairly are antitrust laws. And it is pretty weird. It's really not very analogous to the old Microsoft/IE cases. (Edit: Obviously, it's an EU case, brought under different laws entirely. There's no particular reason it would or should be analogous, but it does look very odd to US eyes, just because the legal principles are so different.)
  - Brakenshire 12y ago
    It's talking about the use of a dominant position in search to muscle into other markets, not challenging search dominance directly.
elsewhen 12y ago
There doesn't need to be any "forcing" to violate competition laws (known as "antitrust" in the US). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law Such laws seek to "promote and maintain fair competition"
- adventured 12y ago
  Anti-trust isn't competition law in the US. Anti-trust law in the US does not exist to promote competition. Monopolies are not illegal in the US. The violation of anti-trust law generally occurs when the government 'proves' harm to consumers. It's an almost entirely arbitrary decision on the part of the government as to whether they pursue a company on anti-trust grounds. Intel maintained a near monopoly in personal computer processors for a long time. They were allowed to keep that position, despite the lack of serious competition beyond AMD's small slice of the market. Cisco, eBay, Facebook, Google and Microsoft have also been allowed to keep their overwhelmingly dominate positions over the years. Why? Because anti-trust has nothing to do with promoting competition.
Aoyagi 12y ago
Search engine isn't Google's only product. And since you use "app", I presume you mean "any kind of software", in which case yes, it's called Google Analytics. You don't have to ever use any Google's site, but you are still tracked by them almost everywhere. Although that probably isn't very relevant to this case....
kbwt 12y ago
Android. I don't think Google should be allowed to dictate clauses like this one from their developer agreement: 4.5 Non-Compete. You may not use the Market to distribute or make available any Product whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of software applications and games for use on Android devices outside of the Market. See: https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribu.. https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribu....
- Goronmon 12y ago
  The EU is treating Android as a separate issue here. This seems to specifically be about Google search (and Chrome?).
  - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
    It is. The charges filed today are about Search. And then the EU is opening a separate investigation about Android, though the general concept of the problem is the same: Google relies on bundling and self-promotion to create a walled in and monopolized experience.
coldtea 12y ago
>I never understood the antitrust angle towards Google search. Is there some kind of browser or app out there that is forcing people to use Google as their search engine on all their devices Antitrust law is not about being "forced"...
TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
You're not forced to use Windows either. Anti-trust is when you abuse a monopoly. That monopoly doesn't need to be forced.

I never understood the antitrust angle towards Google search. Is there some kind of browser or app out there that is forcing people to use Google as their search engine on all their devices?

ocdtrekkie 12y ago

The fact that most people use the default, and that Google mandates the browser be Chrome and the search be Google for all Chrome web browsers (largest desktop market share) and Android devices (largest mobile market share). And that they then prioritize their own products and services in Search as well. The issue isn't "everyone is forced to use Google Search" as much as "Google creates a monopoly through connected use of it's various products and services".

mirashii 12y ago
> and that Google mandates the browser be Chrome and the search be Google for all Chrome web browsers (largest desktop market share) and Android devices (largest mobile market share) No, they don't. You're free to use any browser on your desktop. You're free to use any browser on your Android device. And you're free to go into Chrome settings and use any search engine in Chrome on any of these devices.
- digi_owl 12y ago
  And much the same could be argued about Microsoft and IE. Yet everyone but Google Chrome failed to overtake IE. Defaults are powerful things, as so very few take the time to change them.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - twrkit 12y ago
    Chrome overtook IE because it is (or at least at the time, was) a superior product.
    - digi_owl 12y ago
      And the same could be said about Firefox, yet it never happened. Damn it, since Firefox canceled their deal with Google the latter has taken to pitching Chrome whenever a Firefox user visits Google.com.
      - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        Are you even remotely surprised, digi_owl?
    - blumkvist 12y ago
      Yeah, an advertisement on the most popular web site in the world stating "Download the faster browser" has nothing to do with it, I'm sure.
      - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        Years of cleaning malware off Windows PCs has taught me that average users will click on anything that offers to make their computer faster.
    - TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
      Only partly. Much was peer pressure. Much was Google's homepage selling it to you.
  - magicalist 12y ago
    > And much the same could be argued about Microsoft and IE. Yet everyone but Google Chrome failed to overtake IE. If you believe statcounter, Firefox is actually really really close to overtaking IE http://gs.statcounter.com/ http://gs.statcounter.com/
    - pmontra 12y ago
      In my part of the world (Europe) there has been a kind of triple point in March 2012 http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-eu-monthly-200807-201504 http://gs.statcounter.com/#browser-eu-monthly-200807-201504 Chrome and FF overtook IE, then Chrome kept growing, FF and IE kept falling with FF maintaining an edge over IE.
- DasIch 12y ago
  The fact that you are free to use a competitor has no relevance at all.
  - mirashii 12y ago
    Perhaps it doesn't in the antitrust case, but in the context of a response to a comment with false statements implying the opposite, it does.
- gress 12y ago
  They do mandate that it be the default for Android devices.
  - Oletros 12y ago
    For Android devices with Google services
    - gress 12y ago
      Which is the vast majority of android devices sold outside China, and is exactly the kind of bundling that antitrust actions are interested in.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
linkregister 12y ago
Not withstanding that Opera, Firefox, and other browsers are available in the Google Play store for android, you can easily change the default search in the Settings menu. The ease of this change can be compared to changing the default search in Internet Explorer or Safari. [1] [1] http://www.androidcentral.com/how-change-your-default-search-engine-chrome http://www.androidcentral.com/how-change-your-default-search...
- ocdtrekkie 12y ago
  The fact that you can change it is irrelevant. Microsoft learned that the hard way. Most people will use the default.
  - Goronmon 12y ago
    But the landscape has changed quite a bit since the days of Microsoft bunding IE. Changing browsers and search engines is a trivial task nowadays. Plus, Microsoft's problems were tied to Windows with IE. It appears this is just about Search results and/or Chrome, as they outline Android specifically as something they are now investigating.
  - mirashii 12y ago
    It's less irrelevant when the OP used the particular phasing of "mandates", which is quite hyperbolic and doesn't actually forward the discussion, thus the corrections.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > The fact that you can change it is irrelevant. Its not irrelevant; there is clearly a stronger case for anticompetitive behavior if you include an app as default with an OS and prevent alternatives than you if you provide a default but allow alternatives. OTOH, merely allowing alternatives may not be sufficient, depending on other circumstances, to not run afoul of competition laws in some jurisdictions.
digi_owl 12y ago
The "monopoly" word is irrelevant. It boils down to using a major market position (search) to leverage a position in another market. The whole hoopla about browser choice in Windows was for much the same, as Microsoft used their OS market position to push Internet Explorer, that in turn pushed IIS. Frankly the browser war was a proxy for intranet server competition. Netscape was trying to use internet tech to go after corporate networks, and MS was trying to cut them off at the pass. You don't need to be a monopoly to get slapped with antitrust. All that is needed is for you to be the big dog of the pack, and seen as abusing that position.
- Goronmon 12y ago
  What's the "other market" in this case though?
  - erjiang 12y ago
    Flights. Mail. Cloud services. Office suite software. Etc. Imagine that you search for "orlando new york flight" and the first result is rigged to be Google Flight Search. Or you look for "cloud database" and Google Cloud SQL is first. Google is trying to get into a lot of markets, and its dominance in search could give its many other ventures an advantage.
    - Goronmon 12y ago
      I can see that perspective from one angle. But I still come back to the fact that it's trivially easy to not use Chrome or Google search. There is no barrier (such as cost or method of delivery like in the old days of the browser wars) to prevent a user from making the switch. And wouldn't this all be an issue for a company like Amazon as well? They are a marketplace, yet they also make tablets, e-readers, have a video-streaming service. Aren't they using their position as a online retailer to push their products in other markets over other company's products?
      - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
        It was actually pretty trivially easy to install Netscape. It most certainly could affect Amazon. And I would be okay with that.
Goronmon 12y ago
The fact that most people use the default, and that Google mandates the browser be Chrome These charges aren't related to Android, so where is Google 'mandating' Chrome be used?
- ocdtrekkie 12y ago
  The issue is that Google is default on Chrome. Their charges against Android are coming soon, they've launched an official investigation into Android app bundling as well.
  - Goronmon 12y ago
    The issue is that Google is default on Chrome. I'm not convinced that's an issue. A user has to specifically choose to down the Chrome browser for free. At which point it defaults to Google search, and you can trivially change it to use another search engine. The "issue" sounds really thin to me. Their charges against Android are coming soon, they've launched an official investigation into Android app bundling as well. So, what relevance does that have here then?
    - Karunamon 12y ago
      The "issue" with regard to the browser wars in 201x has always been thin. That idiotic "ballot" thing that European Windows users had to deal with? Yeah. God forbid a modern OS come with a web browser.
    - ocdtrekkie 12y ago
      Extremely similar behavior. Basically the same premise, just a different division of the company doing it.
soxpopuli 12y ago
Google had over 80% of the market before Chrome was even released, and they achieved most of that with MSN Search being the default on Windows. The majority of Web users on the most used browser (IE) manually chose to use Google.

Brakenshire 12y ago

The article says > At issue is whether the company uses its position as the dominant search engine company to muscle out competition from specialized search services, specifically comparison shopping sites, by prioritizing its own Google Shopping search results. Where are you getting that the 'antitrust angle towards Google search' is a subject of the complaint?

Goronmon 12y ago
From the fact that it mentions Google's position as a dominant search engine company prioritizing it's own search results.
Lazare 12y ago
The sentence you quote is referring to antitrust. The laws about using a dominant position to compete unfairly are antitrust laws. And it is pretty weird. It's really not very analogous to the old Microsoft/IE cases. (Edit: Obviously, it's an EU case, brought under different laws entirely. There's no particular reason it would or should be analogous, but it does look very odd to US eyes, just because the legal principles are so different.)
- Brakenshire 12y ago
  It's talking about the use of a dominant position in search to muscle into other markets, not challenging search dominance directly.

elsewhen 12y ago

There doesn't need to be any "forcing" to violate competition laws (known as "antitrust" in the US). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law Such laws seek to "promote and maintain fair competition"

adventured 12y ago
Anti-trust isn't competition law in the US. Anti-trust law in the US does not exist to promote competition. Monopolies are not illegal in the US. The violation of anti-trust law generally occurs when the government 'proves' harm to consumers. It's an almost entirely arbitrary decision on the part of the government as to whether they pursue a company on anti-trust grounds. Intel maintained a near monopoly in personal computer processors for a long time. They were allowed to keep that position, despite the lack of serious competition beyond AMD's small slice of the market. Cisco, eBay, Facebook, Google and Microsoft have also been allowed to keep their overwhelmingly dominate positions over the years. Why? Because anti-trust has nothing to do with promoting competition.

Aoyagi 12y ago

Search engine isn't Google's only product. And since you use "app", I presume you mean "any kind of software", in which case yes, it's called Google Analytics. You don't have to ever use any Google's site, but you are still tracked by them almost everywhere. Although that probably isn't very relevant to this case....

kbwt 12y ago

Android. I don't think Google should be allowed to dictate clauses like this one from their developer agreement: 4.5 Non-Compete. You may not use the Market to distribute or make available any Product whose primary purpose is to facilitate the distribution of software applications and games for use on Android devices outside of the Market. See: https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribu.. https://play.google.com/intl/ALL_us/about/developer-distribu....

Goronmon 12y ago
The EU is treating Android as a separate issue here. This seems to specifically be about Google search (and Chrome?).
- ocdtrekkie 12y ago
  It is. The charges filed today are about Search. And then the EU is opening a separate investigation about Android, though the general concept of the problem is the same: Google relies on bundling and self-promotion to create a walled in and monopolized experience.

coldtea 12y ago

>I never understood the antitrust angle towards Google search. Is there some kind of browser or app out there that is forcing people to use Google as their search engine on all their devices Antitrust law is not about being "forced"...

TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago

You're not forced to use Windows either. Anti-trust is when you abuse a monopoly. That monopoly doesn't need to be forced.