←back to thread

Google is illegally monopolizing online advertising tech, judge rules

(www.nytimes.com)
863 points IdealeZahlen | 4 comments | 17 Apr 25 14:47 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lupka ◴[17 Apr 25 15:18 UTC] No.43718153[source]▶
Happy to see this and hopefully there are some changes. Right now I'm dealing with a crazy Adsense issue and there is no recourse, no customer support and no alternative.
replies(3): >>43718586 #>>43718619 #>>43718696 #
whoknowsidont ◴[17 Apr 25 15:48 UTC] No.43718586[source]▶
There is no shortage of other ad platforms. Breaking up Google isn't going to solve your specific issue lol
replies(4): >>43718857 #>>43719143 #>>43719228 #>>43719239 #
azemetre ◴[17 Apr 25 16:10 UTC] No.43718857[source]▶
No but it would stop a single company from accumulating so much power.

How you can argue such things are democratic are beyond me. There is nothing democratic about trillion dollar corporations that can ruin your business for refusing to play their game.

replies(2): >>43719156 #>>43720880 #
whoknowsidont ◴[17 Apr 25 16:32 UTC] No.43719156[source]▶
How can Google ruin your business?
replies(2): >>43719208 #>>43719224 #
afavour ◴[17 Apr 25 16:38 UTC] No.43719224[source]▶
I've seen countless examples, e.g. a business that depends on online advertising gets its account suspended for incorrect reasons and there is literally no-one to reach at Google to get unsuspended.
replies(2): >>43719304 #>>43719544 #
carlosjobim ◴[17 Apr 25 17:03 UTC] No.43719544[source]▶
If you made your business become completely dependent on a third party, you were already a failure and shouldn't have a business. Being a successful businessman is not a right. It's competition.
replies(4): >>43719619 #>>43719632 #>>43719728 #>>43720439 #
1. Hasu ◴[17 Apr 25 17:17 UTC] No.43719728{5}[source]▶
I love it when my counterparty's breach of contract is my fault because I foolishly trusted that they would do what they said they would in exchange for my money.

I'm sure you also believe that she was asking for it because she was wearing a short skirt and your dad was right to hit you because you wouldn't shut up.

replies(2): >>43720047 #>>43721547 #
2. bigyabai ◴[17 Apr 25 17:46 UTC] No.43720047[source]▶
If you aren't prepared for the contingency where your counterparty bails, then yes, strategically you are failing to commoditize your product for the specific market. I think that's the basis of competition and free market economics.
replies(1): >>43721486 #
3. azemetre ◴[17 Apr 25 19:58 UTC] No.43721486[source]▶
lol in what world is breaking paid user contracts and flagrantly getting away with it democratic? What does free market even mean in this context? That the big trillion dollar corporation can bury you in legal fees or remove your means of making money with no way to question the decision to prove it was done in error?

This is insane. In no free society would this be just.

They need to rightfully be broken up to ensure a free society for everyone, not just the cohort of people that own alphabet stocks.

4. carlosjobim ◴[17 Apr 25 20:03 UTC] No.43721547[source]▶
Show me the contract where Google promises to bring web traffic to your business.