this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
856 points (99.5% liked)

Privacy

31628 readers
749 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
856
Google illegally maintains monopoly over internet search, judge rules (apnews.com)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
108 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

"WASHINGTON (AP) — A judge on Monday ruled that Google’s ubiquitous search engine has been illegally exploiting its dominance to squash competition and stifle innovation in a seismic decision that could shake up the internet and hobble one of the world’s best-known companies..."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

So stoked to see this. A bit disheartening to read this kinda shit, though=

“This victory against Google is an historic win for the American people,” said Attorney General Merrick Garland. “No company — no matter how large or influential — is above the law. The Justice Department will continue to vigorously enforce our antitrust laws.”

Only to be followed a few paragraphs down by

...a drawn-out appeals process will delay any immediate effects for both consumers and advertisers. The appeals process could take as long as five years...

Sigh.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

In other news rain is wet. Damn the legal system is so inept and corrupt. This has been clear for what, like 20 years now. Should have been deemed illegal all along. For profit companies will always seek market domination to maximize profits, always have and always will. It's the legal system & authorities job to regulate so it doesn't happen and take swift action when it does.

They should also break up Google's stranglehold on the browser market but I guess that'll take another decade or two at least as well. Sadly meanwhile this ruling could lead to Mozilla losing its main funding if Google can't keep paying to be default search engine which could lead to even less choice in the browser space.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Google gained their initial position fair and square. They had the better search engine, and despite the likes of Bing being actually pretty good they were never able to compete.

All Google had to do was to follow its initial mantra of "don't be evil". That's literally all it needed to do. Sadly, they were evil, and these are the seeds of that evil. I maintain today that Chrome, YouTube, Maps, and Search would still be dominant if Google were to welcome third-parties to compete and take space on their devices.

This, IMO, is a case that is damaging to their CEO above anything else. It shows that over the last few years many of the steps taken that have alienated fans and employees have actually damaged the company too. The exec actions have damaged them, and as such the execs should pay the price or course-correct.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

But... Aren't all of those things still very much dominant?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They're saying that google services are dominant and anticompetitive, but not dominant BECAUSE they're anticompetitive.

Even if they were playing fair with competitors, they would still be #1 because they were that good. But because they weren't okay with giving competitors a fair chance, they resorted to anticompetitive practices that hurt consumers, and now this ruling is going to hurt google in return. They could have played nice and everything would have been better for everyone, but they didn't so here we are

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

That makes sense, thanks for explaining! I saw "makes space" as what's happening right now, since Android does let you install alternatives for all those, including third party app stores, but it does go farther than that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah...almost like that's the problem. XD

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Many people use the example of Steam to say "well, they're doing things right", because they offer a better service to everyone else.

My point is that Google could have welcomed competition and still stayed at the top. Instead, they created walls that welcomed this ruling, and damaged themselves and customers in the process.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

I may be misunderstanding but why are people saying take down chromium? Please correct me if I'm wrong but chromium is open source and only invested in largely by Google. Chrome is chromium with proprietary code implemented and in no way (as far as I can tell) do they own the chromium project. I quite like chromium just the de-googled version. I think people may be mistaking Chrome and Chromium for being the same or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe someone can explain if I'm missing something

Also I'd love to see the downfall of Google but nothing will change the power they have. The names too recognizable it doesn't matter if given a choice , Grandma or Grandpa or whoever that doesn't care about this sort of thing is picking Google because out of the common options they'll probably only recognize Bing or Google maybe some Yahoo too lol

Edit: I don't understand why I'm being downvoted , I was asking a question and explaining what I understood about the project but that's the internet I suppose haha

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

I think the main problem is that Chromium still contributes towards the browser engine monoculture, as it is bug-for-bug compatible with Chrome. Therefore if you switch to Chromium, it's still enough for the web sites to test for Chrome compatibility, which they will, because it has the largest market share. Users of competing browsers suffer, further driving the lure of Chrome (or Chromium).

On the other hand, if people switched to some other engine, one that does not share the same core engine or even the same history, this will no longer hold: web sites would need to be developed against the spec, or at least against all the browsers they might realistically expect their customers to use.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Chromium is open source but not free (as in freedom). In fact, it is developed by Google and only Google has the power to accept or refuse a PR.

As an example: Manifest V2 is going to be discontinued in favor of V3 on Chromium (and consequently Chrome) despite the outrage of the users and developers.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

I don't think anything you said makes it not free, as long as you can fork it. The same can be said about most FOSS, since somebody, usually the creator, is in control of the repository.

That's the point of FOSS - your repository isn't becoming a democracy by virtue of using a permissive license, but it means somebody could outcompete you with a fork and effectively take over as the dominant project.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I thought it was not a licensing issue but rather that it if someone wanted to maintain the engine with MV2, it would get increasingly hard to do independently because of the sheer complexity.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Yup. Nobody denies you from forking Chromium and maintaining an updated version with MV2, but good luck doing that

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

After reviewing [evidence from] Google, Microsoft and Apple... Mehta [gave a verdict]

Really, this is just a win for Facebhook?

load more comments
view more: next ›