European Commission Fines Google in €2.42 billion for Antitrust Violations

[notb]

They won't Google will pay 2.4B to a legal team before they do that

I'm pretty sure they will. EU has pretty good lawyers as well.
Remember the environment here is very different to US.
Companies rarely win cases against the state. Tax legislation is very precise (we can easily say: way too complex).

Also I doubt this would be a good PR move for Google.

If they'd won such a case against a government agency in US, Americans would celebrate. A private company (just how many times did you mention that?) beats the state. They keep the money they made - that how it should be!

In a similar situation in Europe they would be widely criticized by media and citizens. Yes! The people would take the side of the state.
IMO it's not worth it. They might lower the fine during negotiations, but will have to pay eventually. The actual issue here is: what to do next? Will they change how Google Search works? (doubtful) Will they put a huge banner on top saying "we're promoting our products"?

And whenever you think that EU regulations are stupid and US-based companies will simply ignore it, just think about the Cookie Law.

 

[cdawall]

How is giving into a tyrannical socialist government a good pr move?

And companies rarely winning really pushes that first part. You know what other country people don't win in? China.

 

[notb]

How is giving into a tyrannical socialist government a good pr move?

And companies rarely winning really pushes that first part. You know what other country people don't win in? China.

As I've said: you don't understand Europe. :-D It's been just few posts since we started talking and you're already into "tyrannical socialist government" and comparisons with China.

People in Europe may criticize governments, but they actually like public administration. They like money redistribution. They like this way of living.
We have publicly funded health system, publicly funded education, publicly funded many other things. So when a company evades taxes, here it's seen as "injustice", while a typical American would approve (it's a private company after all, it's their money!).
You can call this "socialism" if you want, but it actually works - unlike a proper socialism that my parents had to live with (i.e. Eastern Bloc).

So if Google pays the fine, it'll be OK for Europeans while Americans might not even notice. Actually, Google could use this as a marketing move.
However, if Google doesn't pay, it might raise some eyebrows in US, but will just be brutally bashed on this side of the Atlantic.

Also, this is just a bad moment for them to make enemies in governments. Europe won't block their websites for sure, but Google is not just an internet company any more. In a couple of years they'll try to sell their autonomous technology here (maybe a whole car), they might get into financial services or internet providing. All these needs a government approval.

 

[cdawall]

And not approving Google in a country is the worst thing a government can do. So where does that leave us? I see Google with the upper hand to tell the EU to kick rocks with their money grab.

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

As I've said: you don't understand Europe. :-D It's been just few posts since we started talking and you're already into "tyrannical socialist government" and comparisons with China.

People in Europe may criticize governments, but they actually like public administration. They like money redistribution. They like this way of living.
We have publicly funded health system, publicly funded education, publicly funded many other things. So when a company evades taxes, here it's seen as "injustice", while a typical American would approve (it's a private company after all, it's their money!).
You can call this "socialism" if you want, but it actually works - unlike a proper socialism that my parents had to live with (i.e. Eastern Bloc).

So if Google pays the fine, it'll be OK for Europeans while Americans might not even notice. Actually, Google could use this as a marketing move.
However, if Google doesn't pay, it might raise some eyebrows in US, but will just be brutally bashed on this side of the Atlantic.

Also, this is just a bad moment for them to make enemies in governments. Europe won't block their websites for sure, but Google is not just an internet company any more. In a couple of years they'll try to sell their autonomous technology here (maybe a whole car), they might get into financial services or internet providing. All these needs a government approval.

you should read the US Declaration of Independence and study history more; especially US history and get a feel of what the definition of freedom and tyranny is.

You also should read what negative and positive rights are because you're clearly lacking an understanding in this.

https://www.libertarianism.org/media/around-web/positive-rights-vs-negative-rights

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/


Most people who value freedom would call the EU governments tyrannical and would even argue the US government is tyrannical with very good objective evidence in comparison to past government in history.

also we have pointed out and showed you that google search engine does not equate a monopoly in any way shape or form. Ask any sane economist and they will laugh at you for claiming a search engine can be a monopoly.

monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.

google in no way has exclusive control of search engines. Anyone can make one and the barrier of entry is not high. Just because everyone uses google does not make them a monopoly.

We have publicly funded health system, publicly funded education, publicly funded many other things. So when a company evades taxes, here it's seen as "injustice", while a typical American would approve (it's a private company after all, it's their money!).
You can call this "socialism" if you want, but it actually works - unlike a proper socialism that my parents had to live with (i.e. Eastern Bloc).

Again you keep bringing up this red herring about taxes. There is no where in this about google evading taxes....god can you be anymore intellectually dishonest.

If they evaded taxes they would be in court for tax fraud...good god man. This is like the 4th time i have said this.

As I've said: you don't understand Europe. :-D It's been just few posts since we started talking and you're already into "tyrannical socialist government" and comparisons with China.

People in Europe may criticize governments, but they actually like public administration. They like money redistribution. They like this way of living.
We have publicly funded health system, publicly funded education, publicly funded many other things. So when a company evades taxes, here it's seen as "injustice", while a typical American would approve (it's a private company after all, it's their money!).
You can call this "socialism" if you want, but it actually works - unlike a proper socialism that my parents had to live with (i.e. Eastern Bloc).

yes the use of force to steal someones money to give to someone else is a positive right and not a negative right and is the definition of socialism.
https://www.libertarianism.org/media/around-web/positive-rights-vs-negative-rights

All these needs a government approval.

This is called tyranny........

The case of google in OP is a prime example of tyranny. As I have showed you 5 times? Google is not a monopoly and this is nothing but a tyrannical money grab that is factually baseless.

(one of many definitions)
tyranny: cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.

It is amazing how Europeans hate freedom and liberties and self-governance.

 

[hat]

Now, notb, I could say you don't understand Americans. How many Americans do you think would be happy if some big corporation skipped paying $2.4 billion in taxes? Not many, I'm sure. For god's sake most of us here are pissed off because Trump won't release his tax returns. That's nice when the leader of a supposedly free nation who got elected by bashing the system and everybody in it, ranting about how corrupt everything is, won't release his own tax returns. I wonder why? Maybe there's some shady dealings in there he wouldn't want people to know about? Sounds corrupt to me.

My argument has always been that I see nothing wrong with a company promoting itself. Would you expect to come to TPU, and at the home page, where the latest TPU reviews are showcased, instead see reviews from a competing site like us? Maybe we should headline reviews from Anandtech or PCMag and make users navigate to our reviews section in the forums to find ours, before the EU sues us for not giving our competitors a fair chance?

 

[rtwjunkie]

Hey @hat I think you are under some misconceptions about what happened. The fine is for what Google was doing up until the EU filed on them approximately 2 years ago. They have since started operating in the above board manner that Bing and Yahoo already had been.

What's this about, you say? Well, when someone uses a search engine, they expect the first few results, or maybe even the first page of results will be what they are looking for, since most people have similar searches and needs on given subjects. That is not what people were getting with their searches, however.

All the search engines sell ads for persons or businesses to get listed. Bing and Yahoo always had a little word next to those first few Ad results, listed as "Ad." Google? Nope. People thought that first result or two was most relevant, when in reality, someone paid their way to the top of the results without anyone knowing it was a paid result.

This is deception, and that is why EU filed on Google. Deception. Interestingly enough, once the EU filed on them, Google changed their practice, and now have that little "Ad" word prior to the result. If Google didn't actually know what they did was deceptive and wrong, skewing search results without telling anyone, and believed what they did to be proper, why change once they got filed on?

The lawsuit was for practices only up until filing, so why change their practice if they thought they were right? Answer: they knew they were in the wrong.

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

Hey @hatThe lawsuit was for practices only up until filing, so why change their practice if they thought they were right? Answer: they knew they were in the wrong.

that is some seriously flawed logic. When someone is being threaten most people do what the person is threatening them wants even if they know they are right. There are very few principled people in the world. Cop pulls you over and says he will make false charges and arrest you if you don't do blah blah blah....most people will just do what the cop says. (this happens often a quick google will show you. US borders stops (75% of the US) is a prime example).

Again government has the monopoly on force......

Now, notb, I could say you don't understand Americans. How many Americans do you think would be happy if some big corporation skipped paying $2.4 billion in taxes? Not many, I'm sure. For god's sake most of us here are pissed off because Trump won't release his tax returns. That's nice when the leader of a supposedly free nation who got elected by bashing the system and everybody in it, ranting about how corrupt everything is, won't release his own tax returns. I wonder why? Maybe there's some shady dealings in there he wouldn't want people to know about? Sounds corrupt to me.

he is under no obligation to release his taxes. If I was him I wouldn't. I value my privacy.

If you want congress to pass a law requiring it so do it. But you getting pissed at someone not doing something he has no duty to do is ridiculous.

Hey @hat I think you are under some misconceptions about what happened. The fine is for what Google was doing up until the EU filed on them approximately 2 years ago. They have since started operating in the above board manner that Bing and Yahoo already had been.

What's this about, you say? Well, when someone uses a search engine, they expect the first few results, or maybe even the first page of results will be what they are looking for, since most people have similar searches and needs on given subjects. That is not what people were getting with their searches, however.

All the search engines sell ads for persons or businesses to get listed. Bing and Yahoo always had a little word next to those first few Ad results, listed as "Ad." Google? Nope. People thought that first result or two was most relevant, when in reality, someone paid their way to the top of the results without anyone knowing it was a paid result.

This is deception, and that is why EU filed on Google. Deception. Interestingly enough, once the EU filed on them, Google changed their practice, and now have that little "Ad" word prior to the result. If Google didn't actually know what they did was deceptive and wrong, skewing search results without telling anyone, and believed what they did to be proper, why change once they got filed on?

The lawsuit was for practices only up until filing, so why change their practice if they thought they were right? Answer: they knew they were in the wrong.

I dont know if EU was different but Google always showed what was an ad. They just didn't put the word ad under it. Ads were always enlarged and bolded.

I prefered this method over the wall of text that all looked the same on bing and yahoo.

Yahoo was the worst. Ads looked like regular hits unless you looked for the thing little ad symbol.

Google had all ad links enlarged and you could simply tell very quickly what an ad was verse what wasn't.

Search
Crab store

Bob's Crabs

Billy's Crabs

Red Lobster

Joes crabs

Milly's crabs



This is how google used to be done and which is why i always used google over yahoo. It was much easier to tell what was an ad on google vs what was a normal result.

I really ahve no idea why people prefer this

Bob's Crabs
ad

Billy's Crabs
ad

Red Lobster
ad

Joes crabs

Milly's crabs



I think the first is much easier to tell

EDIT: did google literally just do an update in the last hour? It doesn't go example 2 anymore. I am getting a camera roll with pictures of products in a sponsored slide.
?????

 

[rtwjunkie]

US borders stops (75% of the US) is a prime example).

I don't even know what this means.

As to the bolder ad listings, most people are not as astute as you, and would not necessarily know that means it is an ad. That's why the little word ad is used now. No question, no deception.

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

I don't even know what this means.

As to the bolder ad listings, most people are not as astute as you, and would not necessarily know that means it is an ad. That's why the little word ad is used now. No question, no deception.

https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights-governments-100-mile-border-zone-map

2/3rds of all Americans are in the USSC 100 mile boarder BS. I was close. 2/3rds not 3/4th

People's stupidity is not Google's problem. That was quite self evident (the bolded part)....humanity somehow keeps making me lower my bar of expectation TT. It might be rock bottom now.....

I wish they at least kept the bolding. It made it easier to actually skip ads :/

BUT

I think Google literally just updated this morning.

Spoiler: google updated today?

weird..one of my edits didn't take but if you google newegg you will see newegg at top with the little Ad box but i still think the other way was far more intuitive and user friendly in regards to separating ads verse regular results mentally faster.

Spoiler: one of 2 old methods and this was my favorite

@rtwjunkie

No fracking clue how this older method was not self evident or the method prior to the update. This also allowed you to clearly see ads s organic and skip ads.....

Spoiler: this is no where near as good

a page showing various changes in 2011. I miss the cached part being a simple click but i guess hiding it in a drop down is smarter.
https://www.ghacks.net/2011/05/07/google-search-new-layout-style/
http://www.seobook.com/new-google-search-results-bar


A complete history of google ads layout...how is this not self-evident???
http://searchengineland.com/search-ad-labeling-history-google-bing-254332

2013 and earlier was my preferred method. I liked the damn box.

 

[Prima.Vera]

For all my American friends here, a Corporation should NEVER EVER be stronger or above any state they where they are offering their services. They are not state-in-state entities to do whatever they please. Hollywood already have dozens of TV shows and movies with topics with above-the-state Corporations and such.
We don't need that honestly.

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

For all my American friends here, a Corporation should NEVER EVER be stronger or above any state they where they are offering their services. They are not state-in-state entities to do whatever they please. Hollywood already have dozens of TV shows and movies with topics with above-the-state Corporations and such.
We don't need that honestly.

no one is advocating that.

People are advocating people and or entities giving the finger to a government clearly doing something unjust

 

[notb]

And not approving Google in a country is the worst thing a government can do.

And why would that be?

Now, notb, I could say you don't understand Americans. How many Americans do you think would be happy if some big corporation skipped paying $2.4 billion in taxes?

At least 2 individuals in this thread seem to be fine with that, IMHO.

My argument has always been that I see nothing wrong with a company promoting itself. Would you expect to come to TPU, and at the home page, where the latest TPU reviews are showcased, instead see reviews from a competing site like us? Maybe we should headline reviews from Anandtech or PCMag and make users navigate to our reviews section in the forums to find ours, before the EU sues us for not giving our competitors a fair chance?

This has already been nicely described here - lately by @rtwjunkie .
It's not about whether a company should promote it's competition. No one expects e.g. an online shop to give you results of the competitors. It's a shop, it sells stuff.
Google Search is a search engine, not a store.
https://www.google.com/search/howsearchworks/mission/web-users/
"
Our goal is always to provide you the most useful and relevant information.
Any changes we make to Search are always to improve the usefulness of results you see. That's why we never accept payment from anyone to be included in search results.
"

 

[HopelesslyFaithful]

Our goal is always to provide you the most useful and relevant information.*
*from our business standpoint.

Google is not a public service or an accommodation (these are even dubious differences). It is a business like anything else.

You seriously have no leg to stand on.

I can keep doing this all day long with showing how baseless you are.

And why would that be?
"

Maybe because 95% (IIRC) of people prefer google over the others for good/personal reasons...........

 

[notb]

Google is not a public service or an accommodation (these are even dubious differences). It is a business like anything else.

You seriously have no leg to stand on.

I can keep doing this all day long with showing how baseless you are.

I'm 100% sure you can criticize me all day and flood us with links from libertarianism.org. I know your type very well.

And it's not me who you should call "baseless", because it's not me who decides here. Google was fined by EU. Care to comment on that situation?

Maybe because 95% (IIRC) of people prefer google over the others for good/personal reasons...........

AFAIK around 90% in Europe.

also we have pointed out and showed you that google search engine does not equate a monopoly in any way shape or form. Ask any sane economist and they will laugh at you for claiming a search engine can be a monopoly.

I never said Google has a monopoly on search engines, nor did EU. The case is based on Google having a dominant position.

You're so blinded by your political aggressiveness, you're already loosing your grip on what's happening here and what the fine is for. Be careful to not lose your grip on reality - it's known to happen...

you should read the US Declaration of Independence and study history more; especially US history and get a feel of what the definition of freedom and tyranny is.

US Declaration of Independence has no significance in Google vs EU case. I don't understand why you're mentioning it in this discussion.
Of course other than the fact that you clearly love to argue about politics (which BTW I'm not interested in, nor is this forum a right place for)

And I'm from Poland, from Europe. I really don't have to learn US history to know what tyranny is.

It is amazing how Europeans hate freedom and liberties and self-governance.

I assure you Europeans love freedom. We just like our freedom differently - not the American way.
But freedom is such a difficult thing to define and analyze. We wouldn't even agree on how a pizza should look.
So maybe we might just stay with computers and games? This seems to be a lot more universal.

 

[TheMailMan78]

For all my American friends here, a Corporation should NEVER EVER be stronger or above any state they where they are offering their services. They are not state-in-state entities to do whatever they please. Hollywood already have dozens of TV shows and movies with topics with above-the-state Corporations and such.
We don't need that honestly.

You already have it. If you think your governments are not as corrupt as the US you are extremely naïve. Lobbyists are just as thick in the EU as they are in the US. For example your refugee crisis isn't about saving lives. Its about cheap labor. The US has Mexico and you have the middle east. Europe was in dire need of cheap labor and BOOM the queen of Europe Merkel made it happen. What's a few thousand dead Europeans vs. the money corporations will save without having to pay native unions. The media keeps telling yall to keep an open mind and if you question where your jobs are going you are a "racist" or a "bigot". The PC police keeps all the little native serfs in check while the government and corporations line their pockets with cheap labor. How do I know this? Its how the US works and honestly the Europeans don't really have a track record of being "open" to mass immigration. Now after thousands of years you guys are the beacon of freedom? Please, the next thing that will happen in Europe is a massive wave of nationalism and BOOM another massive war. Hell you already have people leaving the "EU" due to corruption. Its only gonna get worse when the bill comes due.

Do I want this to happen? No. However historical precedence isn't on yalls side. Also when our stupid ass government gets involve and my ass gets drafted I expect you @Prima.Vera to show me were the good beer is so I can rant about how right I was.

 

[Prima.Vera]

@Mailman

No argues from me on your comment, I actually feel the same if not exactly the same. The problem is those migrants are not only working to any corporation, but they are actually living on wealth fare payed by honest idiots like me and you, and on top of that they refuse to integrate themselves into the system and only following a retarded primitive religious law that, in their primitive minds, think is above all of the government and societies laws.

 

[R0H1T]

no one is advocating that.

People are advocating people and or entities giving the finger to a government clearly doing something unjust

And there's no evidence to suggest that what the EU is doing us unjust, excessive for certain but unjust it's not otherwise Google would've won their case, or fought for it.

I listed Union Carbide in my first response, that's to show what unchecked Capitalism can do, you know that was the single biggest man made disaster ever, bigger than Chernobyl & the people at the helm got away with murder literally. That was obviously because of the money & power at their disposal, also the local politicians were sellouts, not to mention they were US citizens! Now Dow chem, owner of UC, says they're not liable.

Compare that to the BP oil spill, where BP even had to pay for frivolous claims, the payout was probably 1000x more than the UC claim. So in the US we have a foreign company being fined incessantly (VW anyone?) while they usually get away with it in most other parts of the world if they have enough money or power.

The EU fine is as much about deterrent & setting a precedent as anything else, Intel still haven't paid the EC for their anti AMD bribes, hell we had a repeat with contra revenues! So in essence the EU & US authorities act similarly, the biggest difference is IMO that people in the US sometimes cheer when corporations get away with it, using loopholes, but in the EU it's the opposite.

 

[remixedcat]

The EU has to go all they are doing is bullying countries around, taking money from its citizens and then doing fuck all in return for the people. The paris accord was just another money grab where the citizens would have had to pay 2trillion in taxes combined for so called "carbon credits" which are executed by shady deep state agencies that just pocket the money and it does nothing for climate change. Glad trump pulled us out of that. The middle class would have paid 2K/yr for that shit on average per person!

Also The EU punishes the successful to give to the failures! How is that fair to those that work thier asses off?

 

[TheMailMan78]

And there's no evidence to suggest that what the EU is doing us unjust, excessive for certain but unjust it's not otherwise Google would've won their case, or fought for it.

I listed Union Carbide in my first response, that's to show what unchecked Capitalism can do, you know that was the single biggest man made disaster ever, bigger than Chernobyl & the people at the helm got away with murder literally. That was obviously because of the money & power at their disposal, also the local politicians were sellouts, not to mention they were US citizens! Now Dow chem, owner of UC, says they're not liable.

Compare that to the BP oil spill, where BP even had to pay for frivolous claims, the payout was probably 1000x more than the UC claim. So in the US we have a foreign company being fined incessantly (VW anyone?) while they usually get away with it in most other parts of the world if they have enough money or power.

The EU fine is as much about deterrent & setting a precedent as anything else, Intel still haven't paid the EC for their anti AMD bribes, hell we had a repeat with contra revenues! So in essence the EU & US authorities act similarly, the biggest difference is IMO that people in the US sometimes cheer when corporations get away with it, using loopholes, but in the EU it's the opposite.

On a side note BP got off light. I'm from Florida and I can tell you right now BP did MAJOR damage to ecosystems here. The north gulf states got it even worse. IMO BP should be out of business because if a US company did what they did in Europe we would be at war right now. Instead BP paid off our government and went about "cleaning" up their mess. I will NEVER use BP gas again.

VW were just straight up falsifying data to pass even European regulations. Nevermind the US. VW sucks anyway. Over priced/over engineered junk IMO. Could care less about them.

While I agree with a lot of your points, those two examples are VERY bad.

 

[R0H1T]

On a side note BP got off light. I'm from Florida and I can tell you right now BP did MAJOR damage to ecosystems here. The north gulf states got it even worse. IMO BP should be out of business because if a US company did what they did in Europe we would be at war right now. Instead BP paid off our government and went about "cleaning" up their mess. I will NEVER use BP gas again.

VW were just straight up falsifying data to pass even European regulations. Nevermind the US. VW sucks anyway. Over priced/over engineered junk IMO. Could care less about them.

While I agree with a lot of your points, those two examples are VERY bad.

I agree with that but then shouldn't UC & Dow Chem also pay through their collective noses for tens of thousands of death in a county where they operate?

I'm not trying to equate the two but human lives cost less, certainly where money & power is involved. You have people getting away with murder, literally, whilst others rot in jail for years having been involved with drugs or financial misappropriation, heck blasphemy in certain other parts of the world.

The point is we've moved away from a moral/ethics based society to something where the (election) winner decides our fate, it just so happens that those with money/power are almost certainly the winners. This isn't a US/EU only thing, also the governments usually do some populist stuff, for the benefit of common man, but the profit making company is not under any such obligation. In that sense I may believe the govt once but corporations are last on my list of "can we trust" these entities?