←back to thread

858 points colesantiago | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.516s | source
Show context
fidotron ◴[] No.45109040[source]
This is an astonishing victory for Google, they must be very happy about it.

They get basically everything they want (keeping it all in the tent), plus a negotiating position on search deals where they can refuse something because they can't do it now.

Quite why the judge is so concerned about the rise of AI factoring in here is beyond me. It's fundamentally an anticompetitive decision.

replies(14): >>45109129 #>>45109143 #>>45109176 #>>45109242 #>>45109344 #>>45109424 #>>45109874 #>>45110957 #>>45111490 #>>45112791 #>>45113305 #>>45114522 #>>45114640 #>>45114837 #
bbarnett ◴[] No.45109344[source]
So... Google's punishment is to stop paying Apple and Mozilla for default search deals?!

Well I guess that'll help?!

(Yes, judges can search for best market solutions)

replies(2): >>45109482 #>>45112173 #
dragonwriter ◴[] No.45109482[source]
No, the actual remedy is not yet decided in detail (though sharing some search data is going to be part of it), this ruling was basically setting some parameters of what is on and off the table and then ordering the parties to meet on details before further court action.
replies(2): >>45109856 #>>45110109 #
azemetre ◴[] No.45109856[source]
Unless the remedy is that Google's online ads has to be spun out into a separate company away from their control, I don't see how any remedy can be effective.

What can honestly be done to punish them? I mean punish too, certain entities of Google should not exist.

replies(2): >>45110277 #>>45110296 #
1. dragonwriter ◴[] No.45110296[source]
This article and ruling relate to the search antitrust case, not the adtech antitrust case.
replies(1): >>45110557 #
2. azemetre ◴[] No.45110557[source]
I think my worry is that Google should be getting two arms chopped off instead of one finger.