Rendered at 12:48:31 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
Hikikomori 8 minutes ago [-]
This comes years after this fine was upheld about Google shopping in an EU court. I guess prisjakt (another Swedish website that works just like pricerunner) could do the same now.
Klarna bought pricerunner for just under a billion 5 years ago, pretty good deal.
_el1s7 18 minutes ago [-]
> PriceRunner is considered to have suffered damage as a result of Google having illegally favoured its price comparison service for many years
Why would Google NOT favor it's own service at it's own product? How is that illegal?
malfist 15 minutes ago [-]
When you're a permitted monopoly you have the behave differently, including being fair to competitors.
1.5B is preferable to being broken up (not that Sweden could enforce that)
bevekspldnw 13 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
bevekspldnw 16 minutes ago [-]
Why would Swedish courts NOT favor their own national economic interests? How is that illegal?
Hikikomori 42 seconds ago [-]
something something monopoly. Even US has laws about this, currently not enforced though.
UqWBcuFx6NV4r 4 minutes ago [-]
Have you been sleeping under a rock for 30+ years, don’t know what antitrust is, and still feel confident enough to shout about it in a comment?
The law isn’t just “what you happen to intuitively think is right”, especially in a jurisdiction where you clearly do not reside.
namdnay 14 minutes ago [-]
"Why would Microsoft NOT favor it's own browser in it's own OS? How is that illegal?"
buggeryorkshire 12 minutes ago [-]
Didn't Google have a previous lawsuit against foundem? Not a fan of Google but foundem were fucking awful.
raychis 44 minutes ago [-]
$1.5B is significant, but the bigger question is whether this actually changes how dominant platforms rank their own services.
Is this real accountability for anti-competitive behaviour, or just another cost of doing business for Big Tech?
My cynicism is tell me that unfortunately it is the latter.
brainwad 11 minutes ago [-]
IMO the fines do have an effect - Google now withholds a lot of launches from the EU, sometimes temporarily until they have time to have lawyers check them against DMA requirements, but mostly permanently. Ironically the part of Google most likely to persist in launching for the EU is Ads, since money is at stake. All the free, consumer-benefiting services are most likely to be curtailed in the face of aggressive regulation.
bevekspldnw 16 minutes ago [-]
Absolute numbers with BigTech are never significant. Only viable paths for remedy anre outright divestment or revoking financial license in Sweden.
The former is nigh impossible, the latter is fairly trivial with sufficient will.
DANmode 22 minutes ago [-]
Vouched, I feel similarly.
(I can’t possibly understand this being downvoted.
The downvote button isn’t an “I disagree” button.)
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/27/google-brac...
Klarna bought pricerunner for just under a billion 5 years ago, pretty good deal.
Why would Google NOT favor it's own service at it's own product? How is that illegal?
1.5B is preferable to being broken up (not that Sweden could enforce that)
The law isn’t just “what you happen to intuitively think is right”, especially in a jurisdiction where you clearly do not reside.
Is this real accountability for anti-competitive behaviour, or just another cost of doing business for Big Tech?
My cynicism is tell me that unfortunately it is the latter.
The former is nigh impossible, the latter is fairly trivial with sufficient will.
(I can’t possibly understand this being downvoted.
The downvote button isn’t an “I disagree” button.)