Google, EU, and $6B
-
It's a different area of law, making such inane analogies does not work at all. Of course, companies with no presence are not under an equal amount of scrutiny.
harold aptroot wrote:
making such inane analogies does not work at all
Why is it inane? It seems quite reasonable for me. Your original argument was that because Baidu and Yandex aren't popular, somehow the laws applied to Google shouldn't be applied to them. Isn't that the same as saying that the regulations applied to Ford shouldn't be applied to, say, Rolls Royce?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
Brent Jenkins wrote:
The law can't be selectively applied
You joking, right? In international relations the "law" is always "selectively applied". And whoever has the louder TV - wins.
-
Mark_Wallace wrote:
@rsehole yanks who cause the global financial problems
FYI - His name is George Bush.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
First up against the wall!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Sure Thing! Like Apple suing Samsung . . . and losing. Ooops. We'll need another example. BP destroying our coastline and paying spit-change in fines. Ooops, again. Well - I'll think of something.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
BP paid a damn site more than the US companies that actually split the damn oil oh and I don't remember the US companies paying much for covering half of Africa in oil
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-
So, by and large, they're going to fine Google for not giving fair and even results from searches. Someone should remind them that paid positioning is how Google makes its money. They probably know this - so why? Well - think "Greece" - no not the fries available in the Google cafeteria - but the nation going financially down the tubes. The EU needs to help out Greece by writing off the loans and/or giving them more money. But from where . . . oh, yeah . . . now I get it. Were I Google, I'd make an example of them: stuff it up your collective croissant - and pull all my resources (i.e., jobs) from the EU - and then - if the EU wishes to block Google, well, we know what that says about the EU. As for China? I'd just pull the Elephanting plug on them rather than limit searches per their government's recreation of reality.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
The idea that the EU is 'robbing' money from Google to give/lend to Greece is absurd. The EU/ECB have the resources to bail out Greece, what is lacking is the political will as they have the idea that any money given to Greece is just throwing good money after bad. (An idea that isn't entirely wrong.) I see you brought up BP and how a European company destroyed American life/land/sea/assets and paid peanuts. Union Carbide screwed up Bhopal and killed thousands more than BP and got away paying even less. BP's case pales in comparison to Union Carbide's sins.
Cheers, विक्रम "We have already been through this, I am not going to repeat myself." - fat_boy, in a global warming thread :doh:
-
harold aptroot wrote:
making such inane analogies does not work at all
Why is it inane? It seems quite reasonable for me. Your original argument was that because Baidu and Yandex aren't popular, somehow the laws applied to Google shouldn't be applied to them. Isn't that the same as saying that the regulations applied to Ford shouldn't be applied to, say, Rolls Royce?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
no but you prosecute the big boys and win, the small fry will behave, if you prosecute the minnows then Google will not take a blind bit of notice, in fact they probably wont take any notice even if they do get done
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-
no but you prosecute the big boys and win, the small fry will behave, if you prosecute the minnows then Google will not take a blind bit of notice, in fact they probably wont take any notice even if they do get done
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote:
if you prosecute the minnows
I don't really think that you can call Yandex or Baidu "minnows". The fact is that the EU knows they'll get the finger if they try this with Russia or China - that's why they'll be left alone. Just to add, I wasn't actually talking about prosecution either, but if the law says Google needs a banner then that same law would need to apply to all search engines surely? Or is the EU now in the business of making laws on a company-by-company basis?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
making such inane analogies does not work at all
Why is it inane? It seems quite reasonable for me. Your original argument was that because Baidu and Yandex aren't popular, somehow the laws applied to Google shouldn't be applied to them. Isn't that the same as saying that the regulations applied to Ford shouldn't be applied to, say, Rolls Royce?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
Cars have to pass certain tests or else they cannot be imported/sold/registered/insured/etc. Competition laws are applied when someone cares enough to take the trouble of doing it.
harold aptroot wrote:
Cars have to pass certain tests or else they cannot be imported/sold/registered/insured/etc.
Correct. All cars. Not just ones from manufacturers who are doing well.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
Cars have to pass certain tests or else they cannot be imported/sold/registered/insured/etc.
Correct. All cars. Not just ones from manufacturers who are doing well.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
Well, all cars in the EU anyway. But this is exactly the difference, not an argument for why there should be no difference. The difference just exists whether you like it or not.
All cars sold in the EU are subject to the same rules as each other. Shouldn't all search engines used in the EU also be subject to the same rules as each other? That just seems like common sense to me.. :confused:
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
All cars sold in the EU are subject to the same rules as each other. Shouldn't all search engines used in the EU also be subject to the same rules as each other? That just seems like common sense to me.. :confused:
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
They are subject to the same rules, but those are not the kind of rules that are applied by default all the time. They're rules that someone has to go out of their way to enforce, organizing committees and so on, and go through months (or years) of planning and researching, and then convince the EC (it's probably them, right?) that the issue matters enough to be worth their time.
-
All cars sold in the EU are subject to the same rules as each other. Shouldn't all search engines used in the EU also be subject to the same rules as each other? That just seems like common sense to me.. :confused:
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
Exactly where does it say they will not be prosecute? start with one and they progress to the others, make sense to start with the biggest, and whilst the others may have a big global footprint their EU is very small, would not be surprised if Netscape is bigger
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-
They are subject to the same rules, but those are not the kind of rules that are applied by default all the time. They're rules that someone has to go out of their way to enforce, organizing committees and so on, and go through months (or years) of planning and researching, and then convince the EC (it's probably them, right?) that the issue matters enough to be worth their time.
harold aptroot wrote:
They're rules that someone has to go out of their way to enforce, organizing committees and so on
Okay, fair enough. So now that someone has "gone out of their way", I can expect to see the same rule applied to all search engines, correct? Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
Exactly where does it say they will not be prosecute? start with one and they progress to the others, make sense to start with the biggest, and whilst the others may have a big global footprint their EU is very small, would not be surprised if Netscape is bigger
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote:
Exactly where does it say they will not be prosecute?
I'm saying they won't prosecute. The EU only goes for the easy target. Yandex and Baidu will be left alone, I personally guarantee it ;)
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
harold aptroot wrote:
They're rules that someone has to go out of their way to enforce, organizing committees and so on
Okay, fair enough. So now that someone has "gone out of their way", I can expect to see the same rule applied to all search engines, correct? Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
Brent Jenkins wrote:
Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful US companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
FIFY
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-
The idea that the EU is 'robbing' money from Google to give/lend to Greece is absurd. The EU/ECB have the resources to bail out Greece, what is lacking is the political will as they have the idea that any money given to Greece is just throwing good money after bad. (An idea that isn't entirely wrong.) I see you brought up BP and how a European company destroyed American life/land/sea/assets and paid peanuts. Union Carbide screwed up Bhopal and killed thousands more than BP and got away paying even less. BP's case pales in comparison to Union Carbide's sins.
Cheers, विक्रम "We have already been through this, I am not going to repeat myself." - fat_boy, in a global warming thread :doh:
Speaking of Bhopal and "Carbide's Sin", I hold the government of India 100% responsible for the tragedy. What? Why? Union Carbide was made to build the plant away from population centers - which it did. Then the squatters moved in to the area. Now poor people moving into near proximity of industry (and thus potential income) is not unique to India. However - the government doing nothing to stop the populating of an area in the vicinity of the plant and its known potential dangers, is totally their responsibility. Union Carbide isn't the government and cannot relocate its citizens. As for the EU having the resource to handle the Greek (&other) economic disasters - that's not a relevant response. They simply want someone else to pay. The Germans, it seems, are a bit tired of it. Who'd gonna' pony up the cash? It sort of reminds me of all of these countries with their armies and egos wondering when the US will go help out some war-torn area or another. They have their own poeple, equipment, and money - let them go and do the deed. They'd rather, of course, have Uncle Sap do it - in case something goes wrong. Also, war is expensive. Much scapegoating because they're too damn cheap and lazy (or clever?) to get up off their abundant backsides to do the unpleasant little tasks, themselves.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
Brent Jenkins wrote:
Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful US companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
FIFY
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote:
Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful US and UK companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
-
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote:
Exactly where does it say they will not be prosecute?
I'm saying they won't prosecute. The EU only goes for the easy target. Yandex and Baidu will be left alone, I personally guarantee it ;)
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
just exactly how many users use them within the EU? is it actually in double figures?
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
-
just exactly how many users use them within the EU? is it actually in double figures?
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
Why does the number of users matter? The law either applies to all or it applies to nobody. If you're selectively applying a law, then it isn't a law, it's corruption.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.