Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Monday September 28 2020, @01:43PM   Printer-friendly

Justice Dept. to Brief States on Google Antitrust Inquiry:

The Justice Department on Wednesday plans to brief officials from state attorneys general offices on its antitrust action against Google, in what is expected to be one of the final steps before filing a landmark case against the tech giant.

The department will outline a potential lawsuit against Google in a call with state attorneys general, according to four people with knowledge of the plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the deliberations are private. The suit could come within days, they said.

The case is expected to focus on the company's search business, and whether the company used its dominant search position to block rivals and harm consumers, according to some of the people. The suit may also accuse the company of anticompetitive practices in the ad tech market, but that part of the investigation hasn't been as fully developed as the case on search, the people said.

An agency spokeswoman declined to comment. A press officer for Google didn't immediately respond to requests for comment.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @02:30PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @02:30PM (#1058152)

    They are just the up and coming little upstart taking on the establishment. They CAN'T be monopolists.

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Monday September 28 2020, @02:39PM (11 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday September 28 2020, @02:39PM (#1058153)

    So what if Google is being monopolistic? Why is this a problem?

    The Republicans were perfectly happy to let Microsoft off the hook scot-free back in 2000 when George W Bush took over. His DOJ basically dropped the case after it had already been won. Bush himself said he thought there should only be one standard OS.

    Now the Republicans have a problem with monopolism? Probably just because Google's finally started taking down some of the right-wing conspiracy theory garbage on YouTube.

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 28 2020, @05:59PM (9 children)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 28 2020, @05:59PM (#1058232) Journal

      Good point. Why WAS Microsoft let off the hook? I suppose a lot of money changed hands somewhere, that we've never uncovered. That, and George Bush was entirely too dense to have any clues about monopolies.

      Today, though, with the partisan bullshit from Sillycone Valley, the Republicans are waking up to the dangers of monopolies. Thanks to partisanship, I fully expect the tables to turn, and we'll find Democrats defending the monopolies.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @06:24PM (3 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @06:24PM (#1058245)

        Google hardly has a monopoly. There is Bing, Yahoo, Duckduckgo, and many other search engines to choose from. Just because I voluntarily choose to use Google and many others do hardly makes them a monopoly. The barrier to entry is relatively low.

        What is a much bigger problem is Cableco/Telco (both cell phones and landlines)/Broadcasting monopolies. I don't have that many ISPs to choose from.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @06:55PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @06:55PM (#1058254)

          Now where you might have a much bigger point is this thing where Google is trying to now charge platforms 30 percent that have previously established themselves on the platform freely such as Netflix. While it may be true that many of those apps have been trying to avoid paying Google for using the play store by charging customers separately Google shouldn't have allowed these companies so much time to freely establish themselves on many android devices before suddenly deciding to charge them after they have already been well established. This can harm consumers that already own the android devices they already bought after the fact. They should at least grandfather in the current players but doing so would give newcomers an unfair disadvantage and that could potentially be anti-competitive.

        • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday September 28 2020, @06:57PM (1 child)

          by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday September 28 2020, @06:57PM (#1058255)

          The availability of alternatives doesn't prevent a business from being a monopolist and subject to anti-trust law; it's marketshare that determines this. Back in the 90s, Linux and BeOs existed (plus MacOS), but they were so tiny that they didn't matter: 95+% of everyone used Windows, so they were a monopoly.

          However, the ability to use alternatives is also an important factor: how easily can you switch from Google search to Bing or DDG? It's very easy; just enter a different URL. How easily can you switch to a different desktop OS? That isn't so easy. The other OS may not run on your hardware, your existing software probably won't work on it, etc. So I do agree that whining about Google's search dominating the market is unfounded. Lots of people including myself use DDG to avoid giving Google too much information and power.

          You're absolutely right about ISP monopolies/duopolies. Those are a big problem, and actually result in Americans paying a small fortune for internet access compared to other developed nations. Good luck getting the Republicans to focus on that though; they'd rather throw money at the ISPs who then promise to use the money to build infrastructure (particularly to rural areas), and then just pocket the money instead.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @07:08PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @07:08PM (#1058258)

            The key difference is that it's much harder for consumers to switch operating systems than it is for them to switch search engines.

      • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Monday September 28 2020, @08:17PM (4 children)

        by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday September 28 2020, @08:17PM (#1058278)

        There are no "liberal" or "conservative" corporations.

        Sure, lots of people in Silicon Valley are probably reliable Democrat voters, but the people who really matter don't give a toss about any of that nonsense.

        They are, however happy to use "us v them" to get you to vote against your own interests, and they've succeeded.

        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 28 2020, @08:42PM (3 children)

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 28 2020, @08:42PM (#1058288) Journal

          I think it has been pretty well proven that most of Silicone Valley has "progressive" attitudes, and that they align with Democrat ideas and values more than Republican. Google stands out with their almost frantic search for female employees, and their efforts to push women into STEM and tech careers. More conservative companies simply don't care about gender or minority ratios in the company. They will only respond to outside influence, whether that influence be government, union, or something like a boycott after they have offended the public consciousness.

          "White male bad" is a pretty common theme throughout the Dem/liberal/progressive world.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @08:51PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @08:51PM (#1058292)

            Well Republicans no longer have values. They are the pure unadulterated party of greed and corruption. The fact that you spew more ignorant propaganda shiws how well they skullfucked your brain. Maybe you should come out to California, try living amongst your supposed enemies and treat it more like a safari and less like a missionary conversion tour. You might find you have way fewer enemies than Fox misleads you to believe.

            • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 28 2020, @09:54PM

              by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 28 2020, @09:54PM (#1058305) Journal

              *yawn*

              I'll just hang around to see if anyone has a partisan response.

          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by PartTimeZombie on Monday September 28 2020, @10:24PM

            by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Monday September 28 2020, @10:24PM (#1058313)

            No, they pretend to have "progressive" attitudes, and their "their almost frantic search for female employees" is actually the almost frantic search for the cheapest employees.

            The huge corporation I work for is exactly the same as Google in that regard, and would not be considered particularly progressive. We do have a Women's Leadership group, and some sort of LGBTQ group as well, but the very top of the business is entirely white male and always has been. It is window dressing.

            You've just chosen to identify yourself with a particular in group and have accepted their contention that the other team are wrong and bad, and look at those guys! They're the other team.

            They're not really though.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @06:00PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @06:00PM (#1058233)

      Google's monopolistic effects on America are far more extensive than Microsoft's ever were. Microsoft's monopoly was based on selling you software. Google's is based on controlling communication and extensive spying.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @07:57PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @07:57PM (#1058267)

    Microsoft did. (W.)

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @08:40PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 28 2020, @08:40PM (#1058286)

      Trump is for sale.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @03:28AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 29 2020, @03:28AM (#1058483)

        Maybe, maybe not. We'll have to see if he supports Yandex now that the suit is public.

(1)