Support NeoGAF

[Funky Papa]

Yep, and gaf represents the left of americans too. Imagine what the posts would be like if it was a right leaning place.

Much of the liberal wing of GAF is usually very liberal until it comes to their own taxes and defending American corporations abroad. Then it nearly turns Reaganite.

It's an actual constant.

 

[Leyasu]

good old-fashioned shakedown

Basically. If this was an EU giant, they wouldn't say a fucking word.

 

[Alx]

Why refrain from using the best service for malpractice in some areas when the EU will look out for you and make sure they aren't abusing their market position?

You could try pushing towards more balance, that will also lessen the likeliness of monopolistic abuses...
Anyway as someone who uses both bing and google, I don't consider one better than the other, they both do the job fine. Google was a huge hit compared to altavista or yahoo because it was much leaner and faster at the time, but today I don't think it can claim offering a better experience. It's just so common that people won't even question using it.

 

[elyetis]

Is Google Shopping in a dominant market position in Europe? Because it seems like no one uses it here in the US.

From the OP link :

The effect of Google's illegal practices

Google's illegal practices have had a significant impact on competition between Google's own comparison shopping service and rival services. They allowed Google's comparison shopping service to make significant gains in traffic at the expense of its rivals and to the detriment of European consumers.

Given Google's dominance in general internet search, its search engine is an important source of traffic. As a result of Google's illegal practices, traffic to Google's comparison shopping service increased significantly, whilst rivals have suffered very substantial losses of traffic on a lasting basis.

Since the beginning of each abuse, Google's comparison shopping service has increased its traffic 45-fold in the United Kingdom, 35-fold in Germany, 19-fold in France, 29-fold in the Netherlands, 17-fold in Spain and 14-fold in Italy.
Following the demotions applied by Google, traffic to rival comparison shopping services on the other hand dropped significantly. For example, the Commission found specific evidence of sudden drops of traffic to certain rival websites of 85% in the United Kingdom, up to 92% in Germany and 80% in France. These sudden drops could also not be explained by other factors. Some competitors have adapted and managed to recover some traffic but never in full.

In combination with the Commission's other findings, this shows that Google's practices have stifled competition on the merits in comparison shopping markets, depriving European consumers of genuine choice and innovation.

And based on my experience working on a website selling fridge, oven, etc.. ( in France ) Google Shopping was pretty big, thought I can't remember how it compared to leguide.com.

 

[ViviOggi]

Google should surround EU search results pages with ads like something out of Idiocracy

It seems like a shameless attempt to take money from a profitable US company and put it into the EU budget. Their internet regulations are pretty ridiculous

SCREAMING

 

[tokkun]

My point was the user claiming the EU targets foreign companies for shakedowns - they have sued both local and foreign firms, including Microsoft and Intel, for legitimate reasons. I was simply providing an example of recent case.

Your example compared a single US company involved in an ambiguous infraction being assigned the same penalty as a group of European companies involved in the most obvious and severe form of criminal monopoly abuse.

It's like saying that there is no racial bias in criminal courts because a person of race A gets the same sentence for drug possession as a person of race B who commits murder.

 

[*Splinter]

Basically. If this was an EU giant, they wouldn't say a fucking word.

By "they" do you mean the EU or people in this thread criticizing the EU?

 

[tuxfool]

It's just so common that people won't even question using it.

That in itself is a problem. You can't just come along with a superior product, just crossing over the hill of mindshare would bankrupt most companies.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Basically. If this was an EU giant, they wouldn't say a fucking word.

In every one of these threads it is pointed out how the EU regularly fines EU companies for hunderds of millions up towards multiple billions of euros.

Some of the highest fines have been given to Daimler (German), DAF (originally Dutch I think), Saint Gobain (French), Philips (Dutch), LG (Korean), Volvo/Renault (French), Deutsche Bank (German), Siemens (German). Those are some of the largest EU companies you can find.

But sure, the EU only targets the poor American companies.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

You could try pushing towards more balance, that will also lessen the likeliness of monopolistic abuses...
Anyway as someone who uses both bing and google, I don't consider one better than the other, they both do the job fine. Google was a huge hit compared to altavista or yahoo because it was much leaner and faster at the time, but today I don't think it can claim offering a better experience. It's just so common that people won't even question using it.

My university has Yahoo set as the standard search engine and it generally finds much less relevant results compared to google. At times I'm forced to go to Google manually to find what I'm looking for.

Can't speak much for Bing.

 

[Trickster]

By "they" do you mean the EU or people in this thread criticizing the EU?

I'd say both. I live in europe and never heard anyone complain about any company getting fined for doing shit they shouldn't do.

 

[tokkun]

From the OP link :
And based on my experience working on a website selling fridge, oven, etc.. ( in France ) Google Shopping was pretty big, thought I can't remember how it compared to leguide.com.

Interesting. I don't think that price comparison sites are used all that much in the US, outside of buying airline tickets. Maybe because most people just go straight to Amazon.

 

[openrob]

companies should just be fined for being too big.

It's called tax

 

[tuxfool]

In every one of these threads it is pointed out how the EU regularly fines EU companies for hunderds of millions up towards multiple billions of euros.

Some of the highest fines have been given to Daimler (German), DAF (originally Dutch I think), Saint Gobain (French), Philips (Dutch), LG (Korean), Volvo/Renault (French), Deutsche Bank (German), Siemens (German).

But sure, the EU only targets the poor American companies.

A lot of Americans are highly insular. They wouldn't go out looking for this information, only when it hits them by osmosis, then they have a skewed view of what it means to actually have a regulator with some teeth, instead of the pathetic toothless equivalent in the US.

 

[*Splinter]

Your example compared a single US company involved in an ambiguous infraction being assigned the same penalty as a group of European companies involved in the most obvious and severe form of criminal monopoly abuse.

It's like saying that there is no racial bias in criminal courts because a person of race A gets the same sentence for drug possession as a person of race B who commits murder.

I'm not 100% sure, but aren't fines scaled by the size of the company / scale of the crime? Google is huge and has been abusing it's position for years, if the fine was a few hundred million it would probably be worth paying and continuing their illicit practices. This in fact would be a case of the EU funneling money without helping anyone.

The fine must be sufficient to force the company to change its behaviour. Else it's not a fine, it's a tax.

 

[Micael]

Well 3 pages until someone used the good old "EU is just fining US companies", this is progress it usually comes up in the first page.

Google should surround EU search results pages with ads like something out of Idiocracy

It seems like a shameless attempt to take money from a profitable US company and put it into the EU budget. Their internet regulations are pretty ridiculous

Yeah not being constantly spied on by your own government, not having ISP push for """"""High Speed Lanes"""""" aka "it would be a shame if something happen to the speed of your internet service", being able to have access to your own information, making sure that information is protected and so on is indeed pretty ridiculous.

 

[ClosingADoor]

My university has Yahoo set as the standard search engine and it generally finds much less relevant results compared to google. At times I'm forced to go to Google manually to find what I'm looking for.

Can't speak much for Bing.

I think Bing actually powers a lot of Yahoo's search. They have some strange agreement about this, where Bing does a certain amount of Yahoo's searches.

Yeah not being constantly spied on by your own government, not having ISP push for """"""High Speed Lanes"""""" aka "it would be a shame if something happen to the speed of your internet service", being able to have access to your own information, making sure that information is protected and so on is indeed pretty ridiculous.

I particularity hate how phone companies can't charge ridiculous rates anymore for using mobile data in other EU countries. Damn EU and their rules! /s

 

[Trickster]

It's called tax

That thing companies love to wiggle out of paying as best they can?

 

[Palette Swap]

Good. All the caping for a megacorp ITT is embarrassing.

Basically. If this was an EU giant, they wouldn't say a fucking word.

Yeah, like with the truck cartel. These companies weren't European at all.

 

[Endgegner]

My university has Yahoo set as the standard search engine and it generally finds much less relevant results compared to google. At times I'm forced to go to Google manually to find what I'm looking for.

Can't speak much for Bing.

Yahoo uses Bing

 

[jm89]

Alot of 'Patriots' in this thread.

 

[Leyasu]

By "they" do you mean the EU or people in this thread criticizing the EU?

No, I meant the commission.

In every one of these threads it is pointed out how the EU regularly fines EU companies for hunderds of millions up towards multiple billions of euros.

Some of the highest fines have been given to Daimler (German), DAF (originally Dutch I think), Saint Gobain (French), Philips (Dutch), LG (Korean), Volvo/Renault (French), Deutsche Bank (German), Siemens (German). Those are some of the largest EU companies you can find.

But sure, the EU only targets the poor American companies.

I will look this up tonight at home.

 

[tuxfool]

I will look this up tonight at home.

Perhaps you should have taken a broader stance before shitting up the thread with calls about "shakedowns".

You people read like parodies.

 

[*Splinter]

No, I meant the commission.

Thanks just wanted to be sure.

Basically. If this was an EU giant, they wouldn't say a fucking word.

Good grief.

 

[Doikor]

Your example compared a single US company involved in an ambiguous infraction being assigned the same penalty as a group of European companies involved in the most obvious and severe form of criminal monopoly abuse.

It's like saying that there is no racial bias in criminal courts because a person of race A gets the same sentence for drug possession as a person of race B who commits murder.

The EU Commission goes trough a few antitrust/compete cases a month.

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fuseaction=dsp_at_by_date

Basically it all comes down to these 2 treaties that any company operating within the EU is bound to obey (it is the law)

Article 101 of the Treaty prohibits agreements between two or more independent market operators which restrict competition. This provision covers both horizontal agreements (between actual or potential competitors operating at the same level of the supply chain) and vertical agreements (between firms operating at different levels, i.e. agreement between a manufacturer and its distributor). Only limited exceptions are provided for in the general prohibition. The most flagrant example of illegal conduct infringing Article 101 is the creation of a cartel between competitors, which may involve price-fixing and/or market sharing.

Article 102 of the Treaty prohibits firms that hold a dominant position on a given market to abuse that position, for example by charging unfair prices, by limiting production, or by refusing to innovate to the prejudice of consumers.

With this case going under the Article 102. (abusing dominant position on the given market of search results)

edit:

It isn't about the company being from US or EU or wherever. It is about fallowing the law of the land. Break it and you will be fined. The reason you don't hear that many big European companies getting fined for breaking the Article 102 is a) they don't have a market position to abuse or b) they know the law and don't break it. The fact that US doesn't have regulatory bodies with actual balls/teetch to do something about these monopolies abusing their position (or the laws making what they are doing illegal) is not EU Commissions fault.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I will look this up tonight at home.

All cases can be seen here: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/

The Microsoft, Intel and Google ones have gotten the most publicity, but there are a ton more, among which a very large amount of European companies. But those aren't popular tech companies, so it is mostly just dealt with and only gets a sideline in the papers.

 

[Micael]

I particularity hate how phone companies can't charge ridiculous rates anymore for using mobile data in other EU countries. Damn EU and their rules! /s

And what about when you have access to more than one ISP in a region because ISPs didn't got together and decided to give territories in a mafia like fashion, just the absolute worst, and Europe used to know better, all the way back in 1494 the Portuguese and Spanish empires got together and decided to separate the rights to most of the world between them, but then the rest of Europe got all picky about monopolies and their right to compete and all that, and now today we have this mess.

 

[Nordicus]

A lot of Americans are highly insular. They wouldn't go out looking for this information, only when it hits them by osmosis, then they have a skewed view of what it means to actually have a regulator with some teeth, instead of the pathetic toothless equivalent in the US.

In spite of that, next day

"Man, fuck cable companies"

 

[TimmmV]

Someones opinion cant be wrong, its their opinion. You just don't agree with it, which is perfectly okay, does not make it wrong. Saying 1+1=4 is wrong. saying you don't believe in Government oversight and Regulation is an opinion, some markets that have less regulation work just fine others and the vast majority simply don't

Plenty of opinions are wrong, the idea that just because it is an opinion it is arguable and needs to be inherently respected is just false.

Remember when Google went down for 2 mins and internet traffic around the world dropped by 40%, The world is more reliant on google than we are on it unfortunately

Google doesn't exist without "us". No company is less reliant on customers then customers are on them

Plus I find it strange that your response to a company having a monopoly over something as globally essential as the internet means we should just let them do whatever the hell they want, instead of regulating that to prevent abuses of power happening

 

[Shiggy]

They abuse their market power, they get fined. Not sure what there is to criticise, unless you are just upset by someone handing out fines to American companies.

 

[SomTervo]

I love the derailment this thread has taken over an opinion. Some people don't share your same thoughts guys.

I'd love to read this MA dissertation of yours. Link?

 

[Not Drake]

Holy shit at people taking mega corporation's side.

 

[avaya]

The extent to which American posters feel this is some how a witch hunt will never fail to be a constant source of amusement for me.

Pro tip guys, this is what having a competent regulator looks like. It's alright, we know the US regulatory environment is nothing more than a joke.

 

[Tal Shiar Agent]

There is a lot of jumping at the bit here for people wanting Google broken up. Keep them honest with their taxes, but breaking them up is an absurd idea.

 

[Jokab]

More info:

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1784_en.htm

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-17-1785_en.htm

You were involved in this, weren't you?

 

[KarneeKarnay]

This seems like nothing in the longterm for Google. The EU should have gone for the extreme. Not to destroy Google, but a message.

This is practically nothing to what google will make in 10 years. Should have been 20.

 

[Somnid]

Google is a clear monopoly in search, mapping and Android and it would not surprise me that they should be fined for practices there. Even well meaning they have a tendency to step on people because they are careless and too damn big.

Though the irony is this is realistically a ruling in favor of Amazon.

 

[TheDarkLord]

Plenty of opinions are wrong, the idea that just because it is an opinion it is arguable and needs to be inherently respected is just false.



Google doesn't exist without "us". No company is less reliant on customers then customers are on them

Plus I find it strange that your response to a company having a monopoly over something as globally essential as the internet means we should just let them do whatever the hell they want, instead of regulating that to prevent abuses of power happening

According to whom, who sets the gold standard for when something is wrong or right when we talk about Policy and regulation. Governments and Politicians change all the time and with so do their policies and regulations

* Except for Google. Believe it or not Google is an exception to the rule of who needs who. Unless you want to spend the rest of your days using Tor and DuckDuck you're going to interact with a google service in some form.

I dont want my Internet regulated, sorry i just dont

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Holy shit at people taking mega corporation's side.

More like people taking USA USA USA!'s side.

 

[Aureon]

It's always fun for corporate welfare types to yell FREE MARKET at monopoly abuse, huh.
This may end up like the Billions thread with people arguing insider trading or printing fake money shouldn't be a crime because it's victimless.

Facebook, Apple, Alphabet, Microsoft, and Amazon should all be broken up. They're simply too large and their financial capabilities make it so hard to regulate them when they can overwhelm legislators with lobbyists and FUD. It's not healthy for democracy to have companies with so much influence.

Yup.
There's pretty obvious lines about where to, too.
Split up facebook from all it's acquisitions (Whatsapp, instagram..)
Split Apple in mobile\desktop\music delivery
Split Alphabet in Advertising\Search\Services
Split Amazon in AWS\Delivery
Split Microsoft in games\cloud\software

All of these would be humongous undertakings, though, with surely a lot of efficiency losses.

Google's abuse of dominance

Market dominance is, as such, not illegal under EU antitrust rules. However, dominant companies have a special responsibility not to abuse their powerful market position by restricting competition, either in the market where they are dominant or in separate markets. Otherwise, there would be a risk that a company once dominant in one market (even if this resulted from competition on the merits) would be able to use this market power to cement/further expand its dominance, or leverage it into separate markets.

 

[Dascu]

You were involved in this, weren't you?

Just following it from the sidelines.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

There is a lot of jumping at the bit here for people wanting Google broken up. Keep them honest with their taxes, but breaking them up is an absurd idea.

Yup.
then you are just let the hardly regulated Chinese corporations swing in and eat all the pieces..

 

[Wamb0wneD]

Google should surround EU search results pages with ads like something out of Idiocracy

It seems like a shameless attempt to take money from a profitable US company and put it into the EU budget. Their internet regulations are pretty ridiculous

Is this real life?

 

[ClosingADoor]

I dont want my Internet regulated, sorry i just dont

Cool, because this is not about internet regulation but about anti-competitive practices. Which also applies to internet companies.

 

[nicolajNN]

The EU's annual budget is around 245bn euros, the commission spent 7 years investigating this case, and gave a fine that's roughly one percent of the annual budget. If the aim really was to just fund the EU or line their pockets, wouldn't there be much more efficient ways of doing that?

 

[Micael]

Yup.
then you are just let the hardly regulated Chinese corporations swing in and eat all the pieces..

Not really, most google services would get replaced by US/EU companies. Which ofc doesn't make it good to brake google up, but yeah China wouldn't really play a major role if it happened.

I dont want my Internet regulated, sorry i just dont

If governments don't enforce fair competition rules, that is exactly what happens, just look at net neutrality, to get an idea, it is regulation to prevent companies from regulating as they see fit.

 

[MisterFalcon]

I just typed 'wireless headphones' in a Google search bar like in the EU document and while Google Shopping was indeed on top amazon.com, target.com and the manufacturer jbl.com were all on page 1.

 

[numble]

I just typed 'wireless headphones' in a Google search bar like in the EU document and while Google Shopping was indeed on top amazon.com, target.com and the manufacturer jbl.com were all on page 1.

You misunderstand the EU document.

 

[ClosingADoor]

I just typed 'wireless headphones' in a Google search bar like in the EU document and while Google Shopping was indeed on top amazon.com, target.com and the manufacturer jbl.com were all on page 1.

So what you are saying is that Google puts its own service above the rest - and also in a much more visible template with the images and such, which it doesn't allow for anything else. That is exactly the problem, they put their own products before others.

Google abused its market dominance as a search engine by promoting its own comparison shopping service in its search results, and demoting those of competitors.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-1784_en.htm

That is the issue, and is pretty much what you are describing. And it is about price comparison websites, not the actual websites selling the product.

 

[Cabaratier]

I just typed 'wireless headphones' in a Google search bar like in the EU document and while Google Shopping was indeed on top amazon.com, target.com and the manufacturer jbl.com were all on page 1.

Congratulations, you just disproved 7 years of investigation by (one of) the most competent anti-trust regulators in the world.