Moment of truth for Google as record EU antitrust fine looms

“Google is set to face a record-busting EU antitrust fine this week over its Android mobile operating system but rivals hoping that an order to halt unfair business practices will help them may be disappointed,” Foo Yun Chee reports for Reuters. “The European Commission’s decision, delayed by a week by U.S. President Donald Trump’s visit to a NATO summit in Brussels last week, is expected on Wednesday.”

“It comes just over a year after the Commission slapped a landmark 2.4-billion-euro ($2.8 billion) penalty on Google, a unit of Alphabet Inc, for favouring its shopping service over those of competitors,” Chee reports. “The EU penalty is likely to exceed the 2017 fine because of the broader scope of the Android case, sources familiar with the matter have told Reuters.”

“The Android decision is the most important of a trio of antitrust cases against Google. With the company able to make its ads show up in more smartphone apps than any other tech rival, Google’s app network has quietly become a huge growth engine,” Chee reports. “Regulators say Google has tilted the field in its favour by forcing smartphone makers to pre-install Google Search together with its Play Store and Chrome browser, sign agreements not to sell devices on rival Android systems and also pay smartphone makers to only pre-install Google Search on devices.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Regardless of the amount of fine, it’ll be too little, too late. To actaully restore competition in search and online advertising, Google would need to be broken up.

SEE ALSO:
EU Google decision delayed to next week, source says, as President Trump visits Brussels – July 9, 2018

30 Comments

  1. Kick them out and behind the feathered wall where they belong. It’s time for the free and civilized world to wake up, smell the coffee and realize the common thread of all the worse deals ever.

    Then they can work on getting their own computers, operating system and search engine that they can trust.

      1. Hah…there is also MDN’s gross equivocation on the issue of the EU. If it affects Apple then it’s “the filthy dishonest money-grabbing bureaucrats of a soon to implode failing bunch of communist states where anybody doing business is insane!”
        Yet, as the purveyor of a cheapo knock-off OS who just happen to be MDN commercial partners it’s “EU Fines Google” pfffft…”too late”???
        MDN just checked it’s wallet.

  2. Okay, I agree with the Google getting fined. Pay attention that it’s being fined for….. “favoring its shopping service over that of its rivals.”

    It’s being fined just for favoring. Apple forbids a competing App Store, force bundles, and forbids Apps. I won’t say more.

    1. You might as well say Toyota forces you to buy Toyotas from a Toyota dealer and doesn’t allow competing car companies to sell Toyotas. Apple isn’t a monopoly! You can’t prop up your silly argument by saying Apple is a monopoly… wait for it… for Apple products. My god man, if your point of view had any merit there would be greedy lawyers lined up to take Apple down and profit from it.

      1. Right on. Applecynic is a biased cynical moron without much of a brain. Two-faced, Apple hating, tampon-eating, dumb dumb dumb.

        I should be fined for preferring the stupidity of GoeB, right?

        1. No. In your analogy internet service is gas/roadways and neither Toyota nor Apple can tell you who to get internet service from or where to get gas or what roads to drive on. I understand your point of view. The problem is it has no legal merit. Your position is an emotional one. You don’t seem to realize that the iBooks price fixing case weakens your argument by demonstrating that there are legal means in place to govern Apple’s behaviour. If Apple acts improperly lawyers will line up to take them down and make a lot of money in the process. Got anything else ‘smart’ to say?

          1. And Apple’s behavior merits legal governance in my opinion. They are blocking, not just favoring, competition in App Stores.

            You’re going to tell mne “Apple built it that way!” Well then so did Google. One yardstick!

            1. Your opinion has no merit. If it did lawyers would already be lined up to take Apple to task just as they did with the iBooks case. Your own example proves how weak your position is.

              There is one yardstick when the rules are applied to entities that represent a monopoly in the market as a whole. Google meets this requirement. Apple does not. Saying Apple is a monopoly… wait for it again… for Apple products is plain silly. That is why lawyers are not lined up to take Apple to task on the issue you think Apple should be taken to task on. The lawyers are right. You are wrong.

            2. I did not say Apple is a monopoly. I showed you lawyers lining up. Apple has a monopoly in Apps for iOS though. Apple uses its installed base as leverage in everything else they do too, such as music streaming. How MS of them,

              As far as Google goes, they are not a monopoly, there are other search engines, but they also made it so I can’t use the internet without them making money. So I support the EU on this.

              Anyway, it seems we both fit our monikers.

            3. “I did not say Apple is a monopoly. I showed you lawyers lining up.”

              Ummm, you just said “Apple has a monopoly in Apps for iOS though”. That’s just as dumb as saying Apple is a monopoly for Apple products.

              Yes, you talked about lawyers lining up in the iBooks case which weakens your entire argument. You destroyed your own argument. Congratulations?

              Get over it. Your opinion in this matter has no logical or legal grounds.

            4. “APple has only one store for Apple APps.”

              Ummm, so Apple is a monopoly… waaaaaiiiit for it… for iOS. Wow. Keen observation. I’m sure legal action is forthcoming to deal with that monopoly.

              “I know you’re idiotic.”

              When you resort to this kind of immature reply it is an admission that you’ve lost the argument. I can’t take credit though. You destroyed your own argument. When Apple is successfully governed through legal action for being an… I almost can’t write this without laughing… iOS monopoly then you can get back to me. Until then give it up.

            5. “Wise because Apple does have a monopoly on selling Apps for iOS.”

              As the lower court and Department of Justice already ruled this point of view has no merit. You’ll either be proven right or wrong soon enough. It doesn’t look good for you though given the rulings so far.

              “but does behaves anticompetitively”

              You does English as goodly as Trump.

            6. “And you are true to your chosen childish self describing screen name.”

              More name calling from you. Another admission that you’ve lost the argument. Good for you for admitting defeat… again.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.