“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…”

  • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

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

    Really, this is just a win for Facebhook?

    • Mango@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Did you do a crime? Well as the authority round these parts, you know I get a cut.

    • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      If the fine is not large enough to impact their business then breaking the law will be a normal business decision and fines a simple business expense. It’s already like that.

          • atro_city@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            No, I mean the tech behind it, not the concept. The bittorrent application is able to find a file to download from a bunch of other people. Not only the file itself, but parts of it. It’s a distributed search.

            • montar@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              torrents have trackers, special servers that keep track of who’s got which parts of a file.

            • doodledup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              This works because it’s the same file just distributed. But in the case of search, every node would need to have the entire index of the web. If not, how would the client decide who’s index is better and which page rank fits better with the search? I really don’t see how this would work.

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        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.

        • atro_city@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Isn’t searxng just a proxy for google and bing? Not sure how that “increases diversity” or “adds competition” or “improves search results”…

          • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            It can proxy anything you want to. There are a lot of searxng instances out there who have different setups. You could proxy only google or all the search engines that exist. Up to you. Ideally, I would make it so searxng can operate independently and have their own search engine algorithm but so far, this is the most open source and self hostable option available.

        • atro_city@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Had a look: it’s 20 years and maintained by one single dude. Do you think one dude could compete with google? He needs help, and a lot of it.

  • ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.

    • mosscap@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months 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.

  • Ilandar@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is based on older evidence but the exclusive deal Google just signed with reddit makes it pretty clear the monopoly is planned and ongoing.

    • MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

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

      • Ilandar@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It depends on the conditions of the agreement and how much they are being paid. Google’s worldwide market share is above 91% so reddit isn’t actually losing out on much site traffic by going exclusive.

        • MimicJar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          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.

          • Ilandar@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Reddit then disallowed access to all other providers, unless they can promise they won’t use the data for AI purposes.

            That’s what they said publicly, but even search providers like Mojeek that have no AI capabilities appear to require some sort of “commercial agreement” to allow reddit scraping moving forward. It seems to me that Google was attempting to further distance itself from the competition with the agreement and that reddit went along with it because, in some way, it makes financial sense for reddit too.

            • MimicJar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              That’s what I find so interesting about this result.

              For example Apple is paid ~$20 billion, or arguably charges that amount, to be the default search engine. That’s REAL money when compared to the Reddit deal.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

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

        • TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Then you should also not like how Google has a history of making their sites, which are market leaders in many cases including search, perform worse on browsers other than Chrome. That is considered anti-competitive behavior.

  • Melody Fwygon@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    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.
    • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      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.

      • Melody Fwygon@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Don’t they, err, already do this?

        No, They don’t. They have stolen that initial choice from you by paying companies to be the “default” choice. They do this to capture those who are lazy or indolent about their choices, or to entrap those who are too un-savvy to change the preference.

        • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          You do know there’s a big difference between a “default” option and a “mandatory” setting, right? Specifically that you do, in fact, have a choice to change a default?

          Not forcing the user to proactively make a choice is not the same thing as denying the user the ability to choose.

  • SomeAmateur@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months 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

  • xttweaponttx@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    So stoked to see this. A bit disheartening to read this kinda shit, though=

    “This victory against Google is an historic win for the American people,” said Attorney General Merrick Garland. “No company — no matter how large or influential — is above the law. The Justice Department will continue to vigorously enforce our antitrust laws.”

    Only to be followed a few paragraphs down by

    …a drawn-out appeals process will delay any immediate effects for both consumers and advertisers. The appeals process could take as long as five years…

    Sigh.