Google loses EU court battle over €2.4B antitrust fine
Scope of the Ruling / Google’s Pattern
- Ruling confirms Google unlawfully favored its own shopping results over rivals; decision is final and unappealable.
- Some see this as part of a long pattern of antitrust violations by Google, pointing to many EU cases and a long Wikipedia list of Google litigation.
- Others argue this is yet another sign that doing business in the EU is burdensome, while some say it’s a reason for users to stop relying on Google.
Comparison with Amazon and Marketplace Self‑Preferencing
- Commenters ask whether Amazon’s promotion of “Amazon Basics” and house brands is analogous.
- It’s noted the EU already forced Amazon into a 5‑year settlement: no use of third‑party seller data to boost its own products, neutral Buy Box rules, non‑discriminatory Prime criteria, and carrier-choice protections.
- At least one user claims Amazon still appears to favor its own products in EU search results (examples from Spanish Amazon), while others argue these rankings can be explained by price, review count, engagement, and relevance.
- Disagreement centers on whether odd rankings are evidence of ongoing self‑preferencing or just opaque but plausible algorithms.
Corporate Power, Government Power, and “Violence”
- One side supports strong antitrust action against big tech, finance, and healthcare firms, viewing large corporations as quasi-governments that distort markets and speech.
- A counterposition warns more about state power, arguing companies face competition and lack a legal monopoly on force.
- That is challenged with examples of corporate collusion, exploitative practices, and indirect or outsourced violence, plus historical and modern cases where regulation was needed to curb harm.
- There is an extended tangent on the democratic legitimacy of EU institutions, especially how senior EU figures are selected, with disagreement over whether this is “real democracy” or overly technocratic.
Monopoly, Network Effects, and Competition in Search
- Some argue Google’s dominance stems from better products; others say network effects, ad-platform integration, and default deals (e.g., paying Apple) entrench it.
- Claims that Google search quality has stagnated while lock‑in and data advantage prevent meaningful competition.
- Brief side note that Microsoft-backed OpenAI/ChatGPT arose despite Google’s data advantage, though based partly on earlier Google research.
Use of Fines
- EU antitrust fines go into the general EU budget and indirectly reduce member-state contributions; they are a small share of the total budget.
Compliance Strategies
- One question raised: could Google comply simply by dropping rival shopping listings altogether?
- No clear consensus; implications for search quality and legality remain unclear in the thread.