I have many issues with how Google operates internally, specifically in regard to its marginalization of conservatives. But that phenomenon is widespread throughout Silicon Valley so they’re not alone. One thing I deeply appreciate is how far-reaching the Android operating system has become, being able to be used on a variety of devices without any licensing fee. This is very much in contrast with the way both Apple and Microsoft license their mobile operating systems.
Yet for some strange reason, the European Union has decided to go on a crusade against Google:
The European Union recently announced it would fine Google $5 billion for alleged anti-competitive practices in the licensing of its Android smartphone operating system. There is so much wrong with this decision it is difficult to know where to start to critique it, but the first thing to note is that it will very likely harm consumer welfare, and is at odds with American antitrust doctrine. Worse, given the EU’s outsized influence on the world economy, it represents an attempt by the EU to become the world’s antitrust regulator — a move that the United States should oppose with every tool it can muster.
At the heart of the decision was Google’s business model for Android. The company licenses the software to makers of mobile phones free of charge. However, there are development costs for improving the Android platform, and Google needs to recoup these. So it asked mobile-phone makers to install certain Google apps, including Google Search, and the Google Play app store. Customers using those apps provide a revenue stream to Google via advertising on the apps. This has allowed those manufacturers to keep their smartphones affordable.
Lets stop calling it the EU and start calling it the Neo-Roman Empire.
Or the NRE for short…..cause you just gotta have an acronym.
I hate to be Ms. Grundy …. but …
‘NRE’ is an abbreviation. An ‘acronym’ is an abbreviation that can be pronounced as a word … such as NASA and ASAP.
URE
The Unholy Roman Empire
Or longer version
The Many Abject Nations Unholy Roman Empire
lol that shit made me laugh
“Or the NRE for short”
Or NAZI?
This is a “can they both lose?” moment. Scum vs scum.
Not sure if this is more of a power-grab or a money-grab. Can Google just not pay?
Money. And yes Google can pay. But. $5 billion today, $8 billion tomorrow and we’ll be back next week.
Google is evil and thus I welcome this fine.
The EU is eviler.
Google is not evil. That’s just more Conservative Persecution Complex.
Google manipulates data, they do evil things like manipulate search data such as when one types in the term ‘idiot’ and select images a picture of President Trump is displayed, is that not down right evil and bitter?
That’s hilarious. Truth hurts I guess. I think I know what you need: https://www.8shit.net/neosporin-create-worlds-first-anti-butthurt-cream-people-get-offended-everything/
“Google manipulates data, they do evil things ..”
Republicans in Congress should pass a law against doing evil. But they will have to repeal the First Amendment first.
“Yet for some strange reason, the European Union has decided to go on a crusade against Google:”
ChaChing! ChaChing!
I don’t believe it’s any more complicated than that. Furthermore, if they spin that they are doing this for the benefit of EU citizens, it’s a double win. Based on their history, I project the EU’s lawyers and legislators will concoct another reason to collect some more billions from the social media giants within the next few years. The Italian Mafia must be watching this in awe.
Ha, NATO should garnish them for the cheque.
The fact that the EU needs the money has nothing to do with it. Absolutely nothing.
The European(Soviet)Union the USSR is back again reasons why we dont want a North American( Soviet)Union
It looks like Volkswagen needs a $5 billion fine in addition to civil penalties for cheating American consumers.
Robert, help me understand how this case is any different than the multiple lawsuits, from multiple States against Microsoft which embedded several programs into computers utilizing the Windows operating system?
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/class/default.aspx
Of course, I loathe the EU and their Socialist GRAB of every €€££¥¥$$ they can get their grubby little RED fingers onto … but … how is this case any different? And I am reminded that TANSTAAFL … nothing is really FREE when you get “free stuff” from Google, Fackebook, et.al.
Robert – When railroads and canals were enabling the industrial revolution, the courts developed the principle that no public carrier could unjustly discriminate between customers wanting access to the network of tracks or canals. Applying that principle to internet platforms makes good sense. It would mean that all ideas have access to the platforms and all advertisers are treated equally, even those that are related to the platform creator. Google could avoid this being imposed on them by treating all users equitably.
Google is not a common carrier. The underlying physical infrastructure of the Internet – the fiber optics, the routers, etc. – is. Google is no more a common carrier than a newspaper that decides never to publish a letter to the editor that has a conservative slant is.
Agreed that Google is not a common carrier. They are closer to the hardware embedded in the physical phone that connects to the line. If I could buy a phone at Sears, The Bay, or Radio Shack they would all work with the hardware from the common carrier. Now those phones didn’t have processors within them. If the phone that I bought at every one of the stores above would immediately disconnect me whenever I said “conservative” then that would be a comparison to what Google services are doing today. That is what is different from the newspaper analogy – the access to the common carrier is also a monopoly today. If the delivery boy for a newspaper would steal and burn opposing newspapers found on his route then there would be a comparable argument within the newspaper world.
The fact that the phones of yesteryear weren’t smart enough for this type of control or censoring are why the carrier is the focal point of the argument, because the nearest comparison to how the current censoring could be done would be the operators listening in on your calls and starting to disconnect or unlist you based upon what they heard. Anyone who had a party-line was used to the idea of the neighbours listening in on their conversations.
Since the monopoly of the phone (or electric) service are understood, that’s why many of us like to refer back to them as an example of why anti-trust may be applicable.
Google serves Google. The Many Abject Nations Unholy Roman Empire serves Itself. Phuck em both.
That quote from the American founding fathers sounds good right about now. “Ambition must … counteract ambition.”
Let the 1000-lb gorilla (EU) and the 800-lb gorilla (Google) beat up on each other. Maybe they’ll force a stalemate and a competitive balance where the little guy can thrive.
One can always hope.
Im confoosed. partly because I am a modern day luddite & my mobile device consists of a very obsolete LG flip phone.
I thought the ‘anti-trust’ motivation was to *oppose* gouging. but google is licencing the O/S for free?
wtf.
ya, the optics sure dont add up, but we need to get accustomed to this kind of thing with the NRE.
The EU wants to control all aspects of people’s lives.
Bingo!