EU to charge Google with Antitrust

[Rumbas]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/16/business/international/european-union-google-antitrust-case.html

I watched an interview yesterday with the minister and she's also going against Google for favoring their own products in the serps (flights, insurance etc.)

[Rumbas]

On WMW as well:
http://www.webmasterworld.com/wmwbeta/goog/3006006.htm

[Mackin USA]

SEJ
http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-issues-internal-memo-regarding-eus-antitrust-charges/130766/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SearchEngineJournal+%28Search+Engine+Journal%29&utm_content=FaceBook&hootPostID=a84c0d8e88bc0efdd71cdf71ab19594f

[bill]

Liked this one: Case Against Google May Be Undercut by Rapid Changes in Technology

"In the Microsoft case, if they'd just waited a while, the problems they thought they saw would have disappeared because technology, consumer behavior and the market demand changed enough to correct those problems,"

The same, he said, could turn out to be true of Google. The rise of mobile devices and the prevalence of apps could make the traditional search engine less central. And if the regulators emerge victorious, they could end up constraining Google in a way that makes its services less useful to consumers — which would be a hollow victory indeed.

[Rooftop]

Whole thing stinks a bit to me. The press seems very reluctant to mention who is behind the whole anti-trust case.  Legitimate concerns around Google are being bundled up with a healthy dose of horse-crap so that competitors can take them down a peg.  MS have certainly learned from the drumming they got back in 2011 and are betting that Google getting the same will put them in a stronger position.  It's a crappy way to do business: Screw over others so that your crappy product has a chance.

[bill]

Unlike the MS case, I don't really see where this negatively impacts EU consumers. It seems like a political move to me.

[Adam C]

It's a crappy way to do business: Screw over others so that your crappy product has a chance.

Are you talking about those that brought the case against Google, or the basis of the case against Google? 

[Rumbas]

>Case Against Google May Be Undercut by Rapid Changes in Technology

Right, heard on the news that if it goes to the EU courts, it will take at least 2 years for a ruling..

[Brad]

Google has been hiding behind the algo for ages and US courts have even accepted that as an excuse. But now that "impartial algo" defense looks thin and the EU is calling them on it, after the U.S. let Google off for alleged blackmail, copyright, and other serious offenses.  I'd say Google walked right into it, cloaked in a cape of their own sense of entitlement.

[rcjordan]

Going stateless -or at least using 'safe harbor' countries as an operations base- keeps looking better all the time.

[rcjordan]

The Guardian called bullshit on G's downplaying of their traffic to news sites.  The Register doubles down

"At The Register, looking over the past 30 days, Google brought in about 47 per cent of our readers, with Google News making up a further 12 per cent; more than half, in other words.

The Guardian did not release its figures, but Moran did highlight in a second tweet that traffic from Google is roughly equal to traffic that comes directly to the website."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/04/17/google_news_traffic/