If you want to do business there, you have to play by their rules. A lot of people don't like the US patent system (and think the European one is superior), but if companies want to do business in the US they abide by US rules...
(emphasis mine)
Not liking the US patent system is nothing new, however it seems clear to me that the US system provides greater overall protections for patent holders. No system is perfect, of course.
"concerned that users do not necessarily see the most relevant results in response to queries - this is to the detriment of consumers, and stifles innovation." because "showing Google Shopping more prominently on the screen"...
?Two words... SCROLL DOWN. Holy crap, these government agencies must believe that citizens are complete, bumbling idiots who may accidentally confuse an ad from actual results... and then accidentally make a purchase on a site they didn't want to. Give me a freaking break. If you don't want to use Google then DON'T. Just use another search engine.
That's not the point. Users believe the best and most relevant choice is listed at the top. If it's always a Google affiliated link, that is detrimental to consumers.
We know how this will end, Ask Microsoft how well they did with forcing IE into every computer. The EU rule against them and look what you have today. IE went form 90% share to 20% today.
We know how this will end, Ask Microsoft how well they did with forcing IE into every computer. The EU rule against them and look what you have today. IE went form 90% share to 20% today.
Other browsers ate into IE's share just fine without any gov't help. IE has always been bundled with Windows in the US; other browsers like Firefox rose to prominence on their own strengths.
I guess you enjoy consuming what you are being forced feed by a company who thinks they know what is best for you. Not saying any government solution is any better.
To be honest, this is pretty funny. The entire Apple experience is based on Apple knowing what is best for you. Want to change your default browser? Nope! Want to delete one of the Apple apps on your iPhone? Nope! Heck, you couldn't even put some of them in folders! I like my Apple stuff, but they exert way more control over their user and devices than pretty much any other company.
So basically, you're pissed off because the EU regulatory bodies have teeth, rather than the empty pockets of the US system that values Beltway taxes over real consumer protection? Pointless to accuse one system over the other, shakedowns are politician's lifeblood.
Wouldn't it be funny that Google gets convicted as a monopolist by NOT selling the Android OS, rather by giving it away free for the price of its bundled apps.
The latest shake down of a company by the EU. While I know it will never happen, I wish these companies would just give the EU a big FU and pull out of their markets. It is the only way this BS will change.
If you want to do business there, you have to play by their rules. A lot of people don't like the US patent system (and think the European one is superior), but if companies want to do business in the US they abide by US rules.
No point in complaining about it. Unless you think that every country in the world should align their laws so that everything from patents to copyright to antitrust to taxes is the same no matter where you go.
However, I was surprised by this. When I read the headline I fully expected this to be about their search business, not Android/mobile. Though it must really upset the people who trumpet "Android is free and open" when it clearly is not.
Something like the Trans Pacific Partnership, which governments are negotiating in secret and which seems, based on evidence found in leaks, to involve the transfer of involved countries' sovereign powers to mainly US based multinational companies.
That do no evil thing was cute when Google was being run out of a garage. But out here with the big kids it's just silly. No one has taken that seriously for years. Time to rejigger it. Any clever re-writes fellow AIers?
What kind of thread would this be without dasanman69 unnecessarily starting an irrelevant and tangential argument?
Thanks for noticing, but it goes to a conversation [@]jungmark[/@] and I had about what Google can, and cannot force the Android OEMs to do.
Those OEMs freely joined the OHA knowing the requirements that came in doing so. Google will point out that there are other OEMs using Android, and are not required to use Google Apps, and don't be surprised if that ends up saving them.
Thanks for noticing, but it goes to a conversation [@]jungmark[/@] and I had about what Google can, and cannot force the Android OEMs to do.
Those OEMs freely joined the OHA knowing the requirements that came in doing so. Google will point out that there are other OEMs using Android, and are not required to use Google Apps, and don't be surprised if that ends up saving them.
Google can enforce a minimum requirement for its software.
If you want one Google Service on your Android phone, you need to have them all. Someone can't fork Android, keep other Google services, but put their own Mapping product on there.
Android is not a monopoly, and not accused of being one.
Yes, but Google Search is a monopoly especially in Europe. Google is further entrenching its search monopoly by requiring Android licensees to use various Google services including search.
Further, Google claimed Android was open. Third parties could alter it as they saw fit. When companies started doing that Google altered the terms to require more Google control over Google services.
Google also did other questionable stuff like favoring its own properties in search results, which is a clear antitrust violation.
Right that is why Microsoft's Windows was found to be a monopoly even though there was the Mac OS. Apple had a bigger market share than Duck Duck go. In Europe Google's market share for search is over 90 percent.
Comments
If you want to do business there, you have to play by their rules. A lot of people don't like the US patent system (and think the European one is superior), but if companies want to do business in the US they abide by US rules...
(emphasis mine)
Not liking the US patent system is nothing new, however it seems clear to me that the US system provides greater overall protections for patent holders. No system is perfect, of course.
That's not the point. Users believe the best and most relevant choice is listed at the top. If it's always a Google affiliated link, that is detrimental to consumers.
Here's hoping
We know how this will end, Ask Microsoft how well they did with forcing IE into every computer. The EU rule against them and look what you have today. IE went form 90% share to 20% today.
Other browsers ate into IE's share just fine without any gov't help. IE has always been bundled with Windows in the US; other browsers like Firefox rose to prominence on their own strengths.
I guess you enjoy consuming what you are being forced feed by a company who thinks they know what is best for you. Not saying any government solution is any better.
To be honest, this is pretty funny. The entire Apple experience is based on Apple knowing what is best for you. Want to change your default browser? Nope! Want to delete one of the Apple apps on your iPhone? Nope! Heck, you couldn't even put some of them in folders! I like my Apple stuff, but they exert way more control over their user and devices than pretty much any other company.
Pointless to accuse one system over the other, shakedowns are politician's lifeblood.
Wouldn't it be funny that Google gets convicted as a monopolist by NOT selling the Android OS, rather by giving it away free for the price of its bundled apps.
Google = Do Evil.
To think that you suggested Google force the OEMs as to what specs their devices should have.
The latest shake down of a company by the EU. While I know it will never happen, I wish these companies would just give the EU a big FU and pull out of their markets. It is the only way this BS will change.
-kpluck
YEAH!!!!
Standard Oil and AT&T... learn your history man!
If you want to do business there, you have to play by their rules. A lot of people don't like the US patent system (and think the European one is superior), but if companies want to do business in the US they abide by US rules.
No point in complaining about it. Unless you think that every country in the world should align their laws so that everything from patents to copyright to antitrust to taxes is the same no matter where you go.
However, I was surprised by this. When I read the headline I fully expected this to be about their search business, not Android/mobile. Though it must really upset the people who trumpet "Android is free and open" when it clearly is not.
Something like the Trans Pacific Partnership, which governments are negotiating in secret and which seems, based on evidence found in leaks, to involve the transfer of involved countries' sovereign powers to mainly US based multinational companies.
Like that, you mean?
YEAH!!!!
Standard Oil and AT&T... learn your history man!
Google isn't a monopoly. Example: DuckDuckGo
Google isn't a monopoly. Example: DuckDuckGo
What is the marketshare of D2G? 0.01%
Force a minimum requirement like all software have already. That's not the same as what you are mis-quoting.
That do no evil thing was cute when Google was being run out of a garage. But out here with the big kids it's just silly. No one has taken that seriously for years. Time to rejigger it. Any clever re-writes fellow AIers?
To think that you suggested Google force the OEMs as to what specs their devices should have.
What kind of thread would this be without dasanman69 unnecessarily starting an irrelevant and tangential argument?
Thanks for noticing, but it goes to a conversation [@]jungmark[/@] and I had about what Google can, and cannot force the Android OEMs to do.
Those OEMs freely joined the OHA knowing the requirements that came in doing so. Google will point out that there are other OEMs using Android, and are not required to use Google Apps, and don't be surprised if that ends up saving them.
Google can enforce a minimum requirement for its software.
Yes, but Google Search is a monopoly especially in Europe. Google is further entrenching its search monopoly by requiring Android licensees to use various Google services including search.
Further, Google claimed Android was open. Third parties could alter it as they saw fit. When companies started doing that Google altered the terms to require more Google control over Google services.
Google also did other questionable stuff like favoring its own properties in search results, which is a clear antitrust violation.
Right that is why Microsoft's Windows was found to be a monopoly even though there was the Mac OS. Apple had a bigger market share than Duck Duck go. In Europe Google's market share for search is over 90 percent.
It will result in a series of gatorguy posts.
Oh great! Why punish the rest of us? We don't work for Google.