European Parliament wants Google broken up

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

He's dead

They're building a time machine to go get him.
That way he won't inspire Musk.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

They're building a time machine to go get him.
That way he won't inspire Musk.

Make a great Doctor Who episode

[Shane R]

This is may be a bit more than anti-Americanism.

Google controls 90% of all Web searches in Europe, giving it unequaled power it doesn't enjoy in the United States.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/11/21/tech...oogle-breakup/

For context:

Google holds a staggering 67.6 percent of the U.S. search engine market share (tying their own record, which was set in January of this year), according to the latest search engine market share figures for April, released by comScore. Bing remained a distant second with 18.7 percent.

http://searchenginewatch.com/article...Share-Nears-68

[HarryT]

It seems pretty reasonable to me that Google shouldn't be permitted to give favourable ranking to its own commercial enterprises in its search engine, given its dominance of the market.

A good parallel would be the situation with British Telecom (BT) in the UK. BT own the phone network, and sell capacity on their IP network to ISPs, but are themselves also a large ISP. They are not permitted to give their own ISP commercial terms that are more favourable than those they offer to other ISPs.

[fjtorres]

In the US, some people are willing to use Microsoft's BING or Yahoo and businesses are willing to use Amazon's A9 on their websites. In China, Baidu rules. If European customers aren't willing to use or create Google alternatives, that would be *their* choice.

As long as Google does nothing illegal to get their market share, it is up to competitors to offer better value. No different than Microsoft on PCs, Apple in music, Amazon in ebooks.

Penalizing somebody for being good at their job is wacko.
And a good way to ensure the job gets done poorly.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It seems pretty reasonable to me that Google shouldn't be permitted to give favourable ranking to its own commercial enterprises in its search engine, given its dominance of the market.

They already agreed to that.
What they haven't agreed to is to give money away for sending customers to somebody else's website.

[murg]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

He's dead

Naw, only resting...

[murg]

This impresses me as a potential perfect example of unintended consequences.

If Google is broken up in Europe, then the little Duotrigints will all be 'worse'...

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Reuters offers more context:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/...0J525V20141121



Turns out the resolution is broader than just Google:



That phrasing would hit any website with built-in search, like Amazon and Apple, Yahoo and XBOX LIVE. A9 and Bing would also be impacted. On purpose, apparently:

The amazing thing about this is that it has been Microsoft that has been one of the biggest cheerleaders in the EU for having Google broken up. It sounds like this resolution would harm them as well (although not to the extent that it would Google).

I'm still not clear what they hope to gain by breaking up Google. Aside from being big and an American company (both of which aren't illegal), what is the issue that they're trying to solve?

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It seems pretty reasonable to me that Google shouldn't be permitted to give favourable ranking to its own commercial enterprises in its search engine, given its dominance of the market.

A good parallel would be the situation with British Telecom (BT) in the UK. BT own the phone network, and sell capacity on their IP network to ISPs, but are themselves also a large ISP. They are not permitted to give their own ISP commercial terms that are more favourable than those they offer to other ISPs.

That's a legitimate issue, but Google has been discussing it with the EU for some time, and that was going to be part of a settlement agreement (more than one I believe). If that's the only motivation behind this new push to breakup Google, it seems like using a sledgehammer where a scalpel would do.

I can't believe that's the only reason for wanting to breakup Google, but I haven't read anywhere that lists any particular benefits to that action.

As an interesting aside, at least one court in the U.S. has said that a state government can't make Google change its search results, and that those search results are a form of free speech. Obviously that's not particularly relevant to the EU, but it is interesting how different regions balance privacy, free speech and government control.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

I'm still not clear what they hope to gain by breaking up Google. Aside from being big and an American company (both of which aren't illegal), what is the issue that they're trying to solve?

The issue is that it isn't illegal to be a big American company. It has been troubling the EU for years.

[fjtorres]

There really is no established antitrust issue to pin on Google now that they are sworn to search neutrality.

They don't control the supply of the product (website information).
They aren't undercutting anybody of colluding on price because the product has always been free to consumers.
There are no network effects, like with Microsoft, Facebook, or Skype.
There isn't any plausible lock-in effect at play with search.
They weren't first movers nor do they lack for competent, well-founded competitors.

All that really separates them from competitors is that consumers, especially in Europe, prefer their search engine over the alternatives.

Given the context of lawsuits and threats against them in Europe, the only obvious issue is they make a good chunk of money directing web browsers to the properties of old legacy media and they don't pay for the "privilege" of making money by helping them make money.

It could be that, much as MS back in '95, they haven't spent enough money greasing the political machinery or they didn't buy the right politicians.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

That's a legitimate issue, but Google has been discussing it with the EU for some time, and that was going to be part of a settlement agreement (more than one I believe). If that's the only motivation behind this new push to breakup Google, it seems like using a sledgehammer where a scalpel would do.

I can't believe that's the only reason for wanting to breakup Google, but I haven't read anywhere that lists any particular benefits to that action.

I agree: they just need a "firewall" between their search engine and the rest of their commercial operations. A break-up is a ridiculous over-reaction.

[wizwor]

Originally Posted by Billi

I think the background for these actions is not so much an economical but a political one - the actions of your NSA as hinted in this quote from the Reuters article that fjtorres linked to in post 11

The response to the NSA situation is political. If you do not know all countries do this, then you have a lot to learn. The NSA narrative is just a marketing campaign against a country that does it very well.

This is also such a campaign. The EU does not like companies that EU companies cannot compete with. Google has competition in every arena -- it just happens that that competition is usually American.

If google 'enjoys 90% of search' in the EU, that is the choice of European consumers. It's not like Bing, Yahoo, or other search engines are banned.

Frankly, I don't know how you stop this preference given the openness of the internet. I guess the EU could turtle up (like China or Russia), but I don't think its consumers would tolerate that.

I guess they could ban Google hardware. Who does any of this protect?

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by wizwor

I guess they could ban Google hardware. Who does any of this protect?

The other thing about breaking up Google is that search is pretty much the only business at Google that makes a profit.

They're not like Microsoft, with multiple profitable business, or Apple with high margins guaranteeing everything makes oodles of cash. They are like Facebook, a one-trick pony trying to make money off things other than ads and mostly failing.

Forcing Google to divest search is really forcing them to close shop on everything else and start charging for Android. Which is unlikely to produce enough cash to sustain it, much less all the balloons, superbroadband, and robotics "experiments". Their best chance at a self-funding business other than search is their cloud hosting services business where they are at most a distant third behind Amazon and Microsoft, who just happen to have an ongoing price war to settle who is top dog. And there are plenty of challengers for thst third place slot including the unholy alliance of IBM and Apple.

Maybe they think that with no side businesses to fritter ad revenue on, Google won't mind giving it away to EU legacy media.