Google fined €1.5 billion Euros in antitrust fine

[GoodBytes]

Google has been fined by the EU 1.5 billion dollars over restrictive contracts it forced on customers who joined its AdSense platform. The AdSense platform let customers of the platform place a Google search box on their website. Then, when users used the search engine, Google showed them relevant ads and split the commission with the website’s owner. However, if they were use it, the website could not use another search bar, something that the company used to allow when they were not the dominant ad platform. So in other words, Google was able to go up the later thanks to other ad platform allowing alternative search system on a website, then now, once they reached the top, they block everyone.

 

Quote

EU officials said that from 2006 onwards Google prevented AdSense customers from featuring rival search engines on their sites. AdSense let customers including retailers and newspapers place a Google search box on their website. Then, when users used the search engine, Google showed them ads and split the commission with the website’s owner.

 

Originally, AdSense customers were not allowed to feature rival search engines as well as Google’s. In 2009, the tech company allowed the inclusion rival search engines, as long as Google’s search box was more prominent. Then, in 2016, it removed these terms entirely.

 

This is the companies 3rd fine in a row. Last year, Google was fined €4.3 billion last year for abusing its market dominance in mobile space. and the year before that, they were fined €2.4 billion the year before that for manipulating shopping search results. These fines total €8.2 billion, or $9.3 billion US.

 

Source: https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/20/18270891/google-eu-antitrust-fine-adsense-advertising

 

[Bravo1cc]

Well this is just BS, i see how things work round here now...

[Mihle]

Good Job EU!

I wish the fine was larger tho, Google have probably gotten more money from this over the years than that fine is.

[Drak3]

Again, the EU is overstepping it's juristiction. Google's terms are reasonable: if you want to use their services for your gain, only use their services.

8 minutes ago, Bravo1cc said:

Well this is just BS, i see how things work round here now...

While how it was handled was a botch job, there are rules pinned to the top of this subforum on posting in this subforum.

[rcmaehl]

19 minutes ago, Bravo1cc said:

Well this is just BS, i see how things work round here now...

Happens to non-mod posts too. Quality posts take precedent over non-quality posts, even if one was quicker than the other. 

[Blademaster91]

The terms seems fair enough, if you want to make money on your site using Google's services, of course you have to use their search box. This just seems more EU money grabbing.

[Drak3]

21 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

This just seems more EU money grabbing.

It's almost like that's the only thing the EU knows how to do.

[LAwLz]

51 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Again, the EU is overstepping it's juristiction. Google's terms are reasonable: if you want to use their services for your gain, only use their services. 

By the same logic, Verizon could for example block Netflix and only let their customers use Verizon's TV package because "if you want to use their service, you can only use their services". Seems pretty unfair to just suddenly change the terms of service to barren competing service, no?

 

I do not like the idea that just because you use one product from a company, you surrender every right to use other services from other companies in other areas. Seems like a good move by the EU to protect customers and ensure fair competition.

 

Seems like it should be easy for companies to NOT include restrictions like "you're not allowed to use competing products if you use ours" because they are extremely harmful to the free market. But time and time again we see this happening. Why do all this shady stuff with contracts hindering competition?

I believe each product should stand on its own merits. Google should make people use Google search because it's good, not because they have been strong armed into using it.

[Drak3]

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

By the same logic, Verizon could for example block Netflix and only let their customers use Verizon's TV package because "if you want to use their service, you can only use their services".

They could.

 

And they would lose customers, that's how free market works.

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Seems like a good move by the EU to protect customers

Customers aren't being protected by this move.

 

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

ensure fair competition.

No such thing as "fair." This isn't fair to Google, whom many companies leech off of.

[pas008]

1 minute ago, Drak3 said:

They could.

 

And they would lose customers, that's how free market works.

Customers aren't being protected by this move.

 

No such this as "fair." This isn't fair to Google, whom many companies leech off of.

its not free market

its blocking someone else

if company wants to use 6 different ad and search engines they should be allowed to but google is placing anti competition with their use

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, pas008 said:

its not free market

its blocking someone else

if company wants to use 6 different ad and search engines they should be allowed to but google is placing anti competition with their use

Google is blocking the use of other search engines to AdSense users, those that are being paid to use Google as the search engine on their site. If they want to switch, then they need to give up AdSense.

[GoodBytes]

For those saying that EU is making money.

You can't do business like this.

This is like Intel comes to every PC manufactures and goes: All our CPUs will now cost 1 million dollar EACH. But, if you sign exclusivity deal with us, you get normal pricing.

And yes, Intel and Microsoft was found guilty of similar activity ages ago, which included US investigation on the matter.

 

 

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

This is like Intel comes to every PC manufactures and goes. All our CPUs will now cost 1 million dollar EACH.

No, it's not.

 

It's paying someone to work for you, and instead, while they're taking your check, they're working for someone else.

[LAwLz]

11 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

They could.

 

And they would lose customers, that's how free market works. 

1) They most likely couldn't.

2) They would not lose as many customers as you might think. According to this data by the FCC, in June 30, 18% of the US population only had 1 choice of ISP which could deliver 25Mbps or higher speeds. If you want 100Mbps or higher then 83% of the US population has 1 or no ISP options. That is to say, only 17% of the US population has the luxury of being able to switch ISP and retain decent speeds.

 

11 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Customers aren't being protected by this move.

Yes they are. Having an open and competitive market ensures that products compete on their own merits rather than restrictive contracts which hinders competing services from getting a foot into the market. Using your monopolistic position in one market to hinder competitors in another is extremely bad for everyone except the monopoly holder.

 

11 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

No such this as "fair." This isn't fair to Google, whom many companies leech off of.

Well it depends on how you look at it.

Is it really fair for Google to prevent competing search engines? Is it fair from the POV of other search providers?

 

Would it be fair if Intel told HP and Dell "hey, you will need to pay us 100 dollars for each PC you ship with an AMD CPU. If you don't agree to this we won't sell you anything in the future". The result of such threat would be that AMD was removed from HP's and Dell's portfolios, thus damaging the company tremendously. And before you go "HP and Dell would just switch over to AMD", that's not so easy and I think you know just as well as I do that they would rather just go with Intel completely.

[pas008]

6 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

Google is blocking the use of other search engines to AdSense users, those that are being paid to use Google as the search engine on their site. If they want to switch, then they need to give up AdSense.

blocking competition is anti competitive

having google search engine on your website  and allowing ads is one thing

but saying you can only have that one is anti-competitive plain and simple

 

 

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, pas008 said:

having google search engine on your website  and allowing ads is one thing

And getting paid by Google to use their service through Adsense is another. It's the latter, not the former.

 

4 minutes ago, pas008 said:

but saying you can only have that one is anti-competitive plain and simple

They're not outright saying that, nor are they stopping anyone from running multiple engines if they're not getting a check from Google.

 

9 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Is it really fair for Google to prevent competing search engines?

When the site owner voluntarily agrees to partake of a program that stipulates the use of only Google's engine, it is absolutely fair.

[79wjd]

16 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

1) They most likely couldn't.

2) They would not lose as many customers as you might think. According to this data by the FCC, in June 30, 18% of the US population only had 1 choice of ISP which could deliver 25Mbps or higher speeds. If you want 100Mbps or higher then 83% of the US population has 1 or no ISP options. That is to say, only 17% of the US population has the luxury of being able to switch ISP and retain decent speeds.

Monopoly laws would come into play in that scenario. Google, however has no such monopoly as other options DO exist.

[pas008]

4 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

And getting paid by Google to use their service through Adsense is another. It's the latter, not the former.

 

They're not outright saying that, nor are they stopping anyone from running multiple engines if they're not getting a check from Google.

 

When the site owner voluntarily agrees to partake of a program that stipulates the use of only Google's engine, it is absolutely fair.

no this is clearing blocking competition which is anti competitive

 

yes they get paid on the adsense part with their engine

but they are forced to only use that ONE

if a website wants to have multiple ones with other options too(which would be confusing for people in my book)

they should not be restricted by googles contract

thats like coke only putting restriction on no pepsi or dr pepper commericals on espn if they want that coke ad money

[Drak3]

2 minutes ago, pas008 said:

yes they get paid on the adsense part with their engine

but they are forced to only use that ONE

They agreed to that. Google wants what they paid for, what they rightfully deserve.

[pas008]

7 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

They agreed to that. Google wants what they paid for, what they rightfully deserve.

 

 

blocking or restricting competition is an anti competitive practice which is why they are getting sued

[Drak3]

4 minutes ago, pas008 said:

blocking or restricting competition is an anti competitive

They aren't doing either of those things. They're offering a service that pays those that use said service.

 

5 minutes ago, pas008 said:

which is why they are getting sued

No, they're getting sued becuase the EU will abuse their own laws for money.

[PlayStation 2]

Welcome to the European Union, the government entity where you can sue anyone for "anti-trust violations" and probably win.

[pas008]

2 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

They aren't doing either of those things. They're offering a service that pays those that use said service.

 

No, they're getting sued becuase the EU will abuse their own laws for money.

yes they are, they are forcing a single service on to another entity,

when the entity shall be free to use whatever services the entity wants if its 1 or 9000

[Drak3]

Just now, pas008 said:

they are forcing a single service

No, they aren't. No one is remotely forced to use AdSense, thus no one is forced to use Google.

 

2 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

Welcome to the European Union, the government entity where you can sue anyone for "anti-trust violations" and probably win.

I'm gonna sue the EU for having a monopoly on fraudulent antitrust lawsuits.

[pas008]

6 minutes ago, Drak3 said:

No, they aren't. No one is remotely forced to use AdSense, thus no one is forced to use Google.

 

I'm gonna sue the EU for having a monopoly on fraudulent antitrust lawsuits.

lol wow are you clueless you cant offer services that restrict or block competition

this is clear violation

 

 

 

 

so you are saying because I have spectrum internet I cant have another provider

lol