"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
[–] 132 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I sincerely hope they get broken up.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 105 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 30 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    The funny thing is that this probably screws Reddit more than anyone. Obviously fuck 'em but funny either way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Sure, but if the argument is that Google is paying to be a monopoly then they're going to have to stop payment.

    Google allegedly paid $60 million for access to Reddit for AI purposes. Reddit then disallowed access to all other providers, unless they can promise they won't use the data for AI purposes.

    Technically Reddit is the one disallowing access, but if the argument is that Google is paying for special access I don't see why I wouldn't extend to AI.

    Reddit now needs to either argue their data is some special intellectual property worth $60 million or is at a price point more accessible and it sure as shit won't be $60 million.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 76 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    The punishment will be less big than the profit, they won't stop, as usual.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 64 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Even if the punishment is largely symbolic and Google only pays a tiny (compared to it's massive size) fine; I'd still call that a significant win.

    • Google can be REQUIRED to give users A CHOICE of Search Engines.
    • Google can be FORBIDDEN from giving their OWN ENGINE an advantage in search results or advertising
    • Google can be FORCED to ALLOW THIRD PARTIES access to the SAME APIs used in Chrome and Chromium.
    • Google can be FORBIDDEN from BLOCKING THIRD PARTY FRONTENDS from using Google Search, Youtube and more.
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Google can be REQUIRED to give users A CHOICE of Search Engines.

    Don't they, err, already do this?

    I mean a search engine is literally just a website and absolutely nothing prevents you from just going to duckduckgo.com or bing.com or wherever. Don't think Chrome prevents you from accessing other search engines in general, and last time I used it (admittedly a while back) it had a setting to change the search engine used by default if you just typed something into the address bar.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] 64 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Shatter the company like glass.

    They are insanely huge. They should be 10 different companies.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 57 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    Websites and articles that have nothing to do with search or Google have to be designed specifically for Google’s search algorithm. I think that’s pretty crazy.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 34 points 2 years ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 33 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Good, fuck Google. Break up that site.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I hope windows will be next

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 years ago (5 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 21 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The judge said it was a monopoly but there does not seem to be any consequences at this time if ever.

    Mehta’s conclusion that Google has been running an illegal monopoly sets up another legal phase to determine what sorts of changes or penalties should be imposed to reverse the damage done and restore a more competitive landscape.

    The potential outcome could result in a wide-ranging order requiring Google to dismantle some of the pillars of its internet empire or prevent it from paying to ensure its search engine automatically answers queries on the iPhone and other devices. Or, the judge could conclude only modest changes are required to level the playing field.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago

    Today was not about determining consequences / repercussions. It was only about deciding yes or no on the monopoly issue. The next step in the legal process is determining repercussions for Alphabet, and it seems like there are some pretty dramatic options on the table.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Wonder what will happen to Firefox if this ruling means Google can't pay them to default to their search engine. That's a large chunk of their funding.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Wonder what will happen to Firefox if this ruling means Google can't pay them to default to their search engine.

    Yahoo was Firefox's default search engine between 2014 and 2017. It would have lasted longer, but Verizon's acquisition of Yahoo prompted Mozilla to terminate it. They can sign a deal with another search engine if the deal with Google falls through. In China, Baidu is the default search engine, and in Russia, Yandex is.

    Certainly Google will be more careful after this ruling, but nothing will actually go into effect at least for several years, if it ever does, because Google is appealing.

    That's a large chunk of their funding.

    That's true. When Mozilla resumed their search deal with Google in 2017, Google provided 91% of their revenue. But the percent of Mozilla's revenue derived from Google has decreased every year since then, most recently at 81% as of 2022.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 19 points 2 years ago

    It already hobbled itself by letting the results quality slide for 15+ years…

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    Google search is a monopoly? It is losing market share. They really should go after Chrome and its clones

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Just because it's losing market share doesn't mean it's not a monopoly, let alone an illegal one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    It might not be much but it's still legal precedent that will hopefully help it reach critical mass. Like getting Al Capone on tax evasion

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

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

    Really, this is just a win for Facebhook?

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago (18 children)

    We need a federated search engine. Whatever fedia.io runs on but for search.

  • source
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago (16 children)

    How do you build a federated search index?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    Also why? Searxng is a thing. I would argue search wouldn't need to be federated. Makes sense for social media, web is already connected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›