back to article 'We STRONGLY DISAGREE' that we done WRONG, says Google

Google has 10 weeks to respond to Brussels' preliminary finding that the world's largest ad broker abused its dominant position in the search market in Europe. However, the company was quick to attack competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager's decision to issue a Statement of Objections against Google on Wednesday. …

  1. ratfox
    Devil

    The fact they did not manage to kill competition does not mean it was okay to try…

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Surely anyone trying to make the absolute best product in any particular field is attempting to kill the competition.

      I guess you think that's wrong.

    2. Paul Shirley

      Trying to 'kill' your competition is *not illegal*, but the methods used may be. That's true even for (near) monopolies, we just tend to pay little attention until a monopoly forms and allow them to do much less.

      It's not yet decided if Google did more than was allowed at the time they did it. It won't be a politician deciding that with Microsoft funded campaigning ringing in their ears.

      1. ratfox

        The allegation here is specifically that they made their own product worse by showing results to their own products instead of superior alternatives from the competition.

        Though I'll admit that their Shopping results are probably better than showing anything from Foundem, Google+ results are almost certainly worse than Yelp results. Thank God they seem to have cranked down the Google+ thing.

        1. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

          So a company isn't allowed to make their own product worse? Why the hell isn't Microsoft in the brig for Windows h8?

  2. petur
    Meh

    There's a lot of bad to be said of Google

    But if I search something I even rarely see their sites being pushed forward prominently.

    What a waste of taxpayers money... They should concentrate on other Google operations, like big data & privacy

    1. the spectacularly refined chap

      Re: There's a lot of bad to be said of Google

      But if I search something I even rarely see their sites being pushed forward prominently.

      You do see it but it appears so natural you don't necessarily think about it. A few days ago I put "iphone" into Google to illustrate a comment on another Google story - the one where they were claiming they weren't subject to EU jurisidiction since they weren't in the EU market. I specifically noted the adverts and shopping links tailored to the British market. Interestingly when I do that right now I get none of that - despite their public comments it has all disappeared, obviously someone is shitting themselves and has pulled the plugs while they figure out what they can get away with.

      However, that's not the point I came here to make. My point is that those shopping results are themselves a distortion. I didn't ask for them explicitly nor were they part of the natural page rankings. Google saw a query for a high-margin commercial product and decided to include additional content over and above serving my request. Not as a result of the search algorithm, not labelled as adverts, but included as the result of commercial deals between Google and resellers. I don't have a massive problem with it myself but it isn't what I asked for and would take business away from sites I may have gone to specifically to compare where I might buy one.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: There's a lot of bad to be said of Google

        My point is that those shopping results are themselves a distortion. I didn't ask for them explicitly nor were they part of the natural page rankings.

        Google's habit of making the advertising look very much like the search results is not exactly helping either, and you can't tell me that that is a coincidence, especially not after they have been asked already to make that difference more pronounced. It used to be on the top, but now the results are both topped and tailed by ads.

        But hey, we should not deny Google it's income from all the fraudsters who advertise their fake helpdesks that way..

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: There's a lot of bad to be said of Google

        Surely you can be American company and yet deliver relevant ads for British users?

        I don't even understand your point.

        "Google saw a query for a high-margin commercial product"

        I'd say they saw a search for a product that a lot of people buy, and gave a list of places they can buy it. Surely that's what a search company should be capable of doing?

      3. ratfox
        Meh

        Re: There's a lot of bad to be said of Google

        My point is that those shopping results are themselves a distortion. I didn't ask for them explicitly nor were they part of the natural page rankings.

        Meh… If I search for an address, chances are I want to check it on Google Maps, even if I don't ask for it explicitly. I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to guess what the user really means. The only problem is displaying results that favor your inferior products rather than superior products from the competition.

    2. breakfast Silver badge
      Go

      Re: There's a lot of bad to be said of Google

      I think that a lot of the people involved in this case are actually the irritating aggregator middlemen, so that if Google figures out you are searching for a business they will pop up a box with the business contact details and ( if they can find them ) opening hours in your results. Previously you might have gone to one of the carefully SEO-tuned sites that stood in as a middle-man and then seen a bunch of adverts for things you have no interest in. As Google's search has got a little smarter, that business model doesn't work so well and the aggregators and SEO specialists get pretty angry about that.

      As a user, I rather prefer it.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    EU has already said that it will not "fix" the problem

    If Google are fixing the search results (and I am not convinced that a solid case has been made to support this accusation) then they must be doing it by adjusting the search ranking algorithm. However Vestager has already said "It's very difficult to supervise the algorithm ... it is very important to find something that is guided by principle, which basically leaves the algorithm and the screen design to Google". This statement sounds a lot like "we cannot really sort out the problem, so we are just going to smack Google with a massive fine to help our budget, and then keep smacking them when they do not fix the problem in the way that we have not told them to do".

    1. big_D Silver badge

      Re: EU has already said that it will not "fix" the problem

      Which is all they can really do. It was the same with Microsoft, they were told to release documentation for the undocumented APIs and they kept getting top-up fines every time they failed to deliver in a timely manner.

  4. xerocred

    I google for "Webmail" on my Nexus 5

    Microsoft360 was second in a list of 6. There were 3 or 4 paid app adverts above that.

    Gmail last on list.

    So, what exactly is the EU belly aching about? That foundem wasn't there?

    1. Paul Shirley

      Re: I google for "Webmail" on my Nexus 5

      Well... the settlement discussions last year did seem somewhat focussed on ensuring paid ads would retain prominent positions on G search results. Quite how Foundem thinks they can afford to buy those positions is a mystery however.

      Since 'fixing' the algorithm seems off the table, Foundem's best bet is buying ads. The good news for them is it will be a fair contest for those valuable slots from now on ;)

    2. Mark 65
      Facepalm

      Re: I google for "Webmail" on my Nexus 5

      Nice argument. Did you read the article? The case relates to a complaint over 5 years ago with a subsequent 5 year period of evidence gathering and case building. What they do and what you witness now are utterly irrelevant to the case at hand. Jeezuz.

    3. big_D Silver badge

      Re: I google for "Webmail" on my Nexus 5

      It isn't necessarily about what they are doing now. Don't forget that Google have been in discussions and gently tweaking their algorithm for several years, whilst they have been in discussions with the EU. The questions are more what the results where, when the case was started and have Google done enough to counter those claims in the meantime.

      If you caught speeding, you tend to drive more sedately for a while after that. This is the equivalent of Google being caught and having a cop randomly check them for the next 5 years. The initial offence is what counts, but their actions since that offence will also be taken into account in the final verdict and any subsequent punishment.

      So, if you were caught doing 100 in a 50, you face a big fine and a driving ban. If they defer judgement to see how you drive in the meantime and follow you for the next 5 years and you continue to speed, then you will get an even bigger fine and a longer ban, because you haven't changed your attitude. If the random checks show that you generally now obey the limit, then you face a smaller fine and a shorter ban.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    UK-based price comparison website Foundem, ...

    Microsoft-backed lobby group ICOMP ...

    Meanwhile, FairSearch Europe ...

    Do you mean...

    Microsoft-backed metasearch website Foundem, ...

    Microsoft-backed lobby group ICOMP ...

    Meanwhile, Microsoft-backed FairSearch Europe ...

    ?

  6. Mage Silver badge
    Devil

    Competition Violation?

    Of course they horribly manipulate the search results to their own benefit. Note that the results don't have to be a Google service, but favour heavy users of all Googles Adverts, APIs and services indirectly.

    Open Letter to Google.

    Wait till EU realises what you are doing with EU citizen's privacy via your creepy tracking ... to make the Advertising and skew of search results so much more effective.

    All those "Free" services you have that rip off people's privacy:

    Single log in

    YouTube

    Google Groups

    Google+

    Gmail

    Google Translate

    Chrome Browser

    Chrome Book

    APIs

    Cloud services

    Google Docs / Drive

    Google Maps

    Play Store

    Analytics

    Android

    Google Images

    Google Books

    Google Scholar.

    Adsense

    and more.

    I wonder why you shuttered Google Code? Got enough spyware on Github or something?

    Also I don't want Google search to be my bookmarks and for it to promote Wikipedia and eBay. I know how to search those!

    Only some really evil needs a motto like yours. You may surpass IBM + Oracle + Halliburton combined.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Competition Violation?

      Don't use them

      /OR/

      Live in a cave

      /OR/

      Just stop whining

      1. RyokuMas
        Facepalm

        Re: Competition Violation?

        Don't use them

        Ok, find me the links for websites that provide the internet services I want to use that do not include Google Analytics or any other link to Google's products, and I'll use those instead.

        1. tom dial Silver badge

          Re: Competition Violation?

          When you access a site that includes Google Analytics, is it you, or the site, that is using them/

          Just asking.

          1. Mark 65

            Re: Competition Violation?

            When you access a site that includes Google Analytics, is it you, or the site, that is using them

            Neither. Both of you are being used by Google.

        2. big_D Silver badge

          Re: Competition Violation?

          I have Google-Analytics and Co. blocked in my browsers - either no scripts allowed or local hosted.

    2. tom dial Silver badge

      Re: Competition Violation?

      All those "free" services are delivered at no charge to those who use them, and those users are free to use them or not. Those who use them presumably consider them to provide value. Although most of them probably are unaware of the privacy implications of the data that Google* retain, it is not clear that most people are very concerned about it despite the considerable efforts of those who are to convince them.

      It also is unclear that Google's use of the data "to make the Advertising and skew of search results so much more effective" either harms the search users or goes beyond providing the contracted service to their real customers, those who pay them to deliver advertising. This whole complaint area reeks of 1950s pop psychology as exemplified by Vance Packard. If Google skews the results so as to be unsatisfactory to search users they eventually will lose market share to those, if any, who skew the results less (or less visibly).

      *"Yahoo" or "Bing" could be substituted for "Google" from here with no significant change; they are merely less successful than Google.

  7. naive

    This bunch of leeches in Brussels is sickening

    Who is complaining here. Google services are for free, people are not forced to use it, unlike the MS/Intel empire in 1990-2010 people do not have to pay for it.

    They fine a company offering services for free, and who made internet what it is now.

    After they did nothing about the Wintel empire for 20 years.

    Google is a major contributor to liberate the world from the Wintel empire, and now they have to pay EU Commission tax. Was it different in the time of newspapers and tv commercials ?, companies always paid more for ads in big newspapers or on prime time.

    Perhaps they need a few billion Euro to buy the paper and ink needed to print billions of Euro notes to prop up the Greek depths.

    1. big_D Silver badge

      Re: This bunch of leeches in Brussels is sickening

      Erm 3 of the biggest complaints in the Windows case had nothing to do with money - in fact it was exactly the opposite.

      They were using their dominant position with Windows to push a free browser on users and thus destroy Netscape and they pushed a free media player, pushing "real" media players out of the market.

      That is why they had the silly browser ballot and the version of Windows (Windows N) without the media player.

      The other big point was the undocumented APIs that gave Microsoft software an unfair advantage, especially on their servers. Again nothing to do with price, they were ordered to provide documentation for these APIs.

      In Google's case it is similar, they are accused to using their dominant position (in some markets they have over 95% search market share) to push other products unfairly.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinteresting/comments/320sxy/my_car_dealer_posts_their_competitors_prices_even/

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Yesterday's battle

    This is the Microsoft browser case all over again.

    By the time the EU sausage machine has finished the market for search information will have changed radically - probably to a "push" model based on semi-intelligent mobile phone based agents (e.g. Siri, Cortana etc).

  10. big_D Silver badge

    Interesting

    "The ad giant also claimed that there was plenty of competition in the online shopping market in the EU"

    Interesting that they show markets where they don't compete showing innovation.

    It is like saying Ford is manipulating the market for compact cars and Ford say, "but pushbikes!"

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like