Google offers to advertise rival services to allay EU antitrust concerns

[techbeck]

The European Commission has asked Google's search rivals to comment on proposals over how it displays its own specialised search services alongside those of its competitors. To ensure that rival services aren't unfairly listed in its search results, Google proposes to separate promoted links from native search results by using frames or other "clear graphical features," also committing to display links to three rival search services that offer similar features to its own. Its proposals will be set for a period of five years.

The Commission's call for comments comes less than two weeks after it was first reported that Google had offered a solution to escape further investigation. As part of today's proposals, Google says that for devices with screen sizes less than 9.7 inches or a resolution of less than 1024 x 768 pixels, it will make rival links available via a dedicated link.

An example of how Google intends to amend its listings.

Addressing other search concerns, Google will enable websites to opt-out from having their data included in Google's product or local searches, while providing newspaper publishers with tools to control the content that is displayed in Google News. This offers an olive branch to publishers that have previously sued the company over copyright infringement by its news aggregation service. Google has also said it will no longer block advertisers from managing search ad campaigns on rival ad platforms.

Google's competitors are likely to voice their opposition to the proposal. Earlier this month, ICOMP (an industry group that includes Microsoft) said that clear labelling would be "a non-starter" and that Google's proposals do not "clearly set out non-discrimination principles and the means to deal with the restoration of effective competition." We have reached out to both Microsoft and Fairsearch for comment on Google's concessions and we'll update you accordingly.

http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/25/4264484/google-eu-antitrust-commitments

Keep it clean and on topic please....TY

[FloatingFatMan]

It seems that these days, not only are software companies not allowed to add basic features to software, but search companies are no longer allowed to search...

If these other offerings where any good, people would use them. Seeing as they don't, that speaks volumes for their service.

[+Majesticmerc MVC]

It seems that these days, not only are software companies not allowed to add basic features to software, but search companies are no longer allowed to search...

If these other offerings where any good, people would use them. Seeing as they don't, that speaks volumes for their service.

The rules are different for monopolies as opposed everyone else. These kinds of investigations are intended to forcefully improve competition, and prevent companies getting locked out through lack of publicity. With Google's massive market share, it's very easy to for people to forget that there are alternative video sources to Youtube, and alternative mapping applications to Google Maps.

[FloatingFatMan]

The rules are different for monopolies as opposed everyone else. These kinds of investigations are intended to forcefully improve competition, and prevent companies getting locked out through lack of publicity. With Google's massive market share, it's very easy to for people to forget that there are alternative video sources to Youtube, and alternative mapping applications to Google Maps.

I know -why- the rules are there, I just don't agree with forcing companies to help their competitors. If they can't compete, they should fail. It's not Googles' fault if these companies don't advertise, or have poorer quality services.

EDIT: In fact, when Google was the new kid on the block, I didn't see them whining about the likes of Yahoo and Alta Vista's total dominance of the search market, but now that they're nobodies, these other companies complain? Pffft. Tough.

[BajiRav]

I know -why- the rules are there, I just don't agree with forcing companies to help their competitors. If they can't compete, they should fail. It's not Googles' fault if these companies don't advertise, or have poorer quality services.

EDIT: In fact, when Google was the new kid on the block, I didn't see them whining about the likes of Yahoo and Alta Vista's total dominance of the search market, but now that they're nobodies, these other companies complain? Pffft. Tough.

I think one of the complaints was google using their content without proper agreements. So it's a fair game if true.

[FloatingFatMan]

I think one of the complaints was google using their content without proper agreements. So it's a fair game if true.

That part of the complaint I don't have a problem with. Google shouldn't be scraping stuff from sites without permission and that needs to stop; pointing people to it is fine though. It's the whiner babies with their inferior, competing products that annoy me. If they want a slice of the pie, make a better product like Google did.

[Boz]

The rules are different for monopolies as opposed everyone else. These kinds of investigations are intended to forcefully improve competition, and prevent companies getting locked out through lack of publicity. With Google's massive market share, it's very easy to for people to forget that there are alternative video sources to Youtube, and alternative mapping applications to Google Maps.

Rules and laws against monopolies are clear cut.. You can be a monopoly and have 99.9% of the market and not be sued. These laws only apply if you are using your monopoly to prevent competition from increasing their presence on the market like Microsoft did with Windows.

Not a single claim against Google holds water with that, simply because there's nothing that Google that hinders competitors. They are free to do whatever they want on the internet as the market is completely open. If you want to make a better search engine, or a better cloud service, or a better YouTube, or a better whatever Google does, there is nobody preventing you in doing that. And that's the key right there and why most of the complaints against Google are sore losers who can't make a better product so they go and whine how they are getting whooped "unjustly".

[Noir Angel]

I will admit Google are guilty of using their dominant search position to leverage other products, but given the way Microsoft have been doing the same thing for years by bundling IE with Windows i'd just be inclined to call it a case of evening the score. It is interesting however how so many Neowin members b***h and cry about the EU interfering with Microsoft... "it's their product they should be allowed to bundle what they want" but are unwilling to make the same argument when It's Google in question. I hate Hypocrisy.

[ShadowMajestic]

Where were the defenders of capitalism when Microsoft was in a similar pickle? Just cause its Google?

Google has by far the largest marketshare in search within Europe and especially in several countries where Google is 90+% of the market.

And thus a monopoly. And other rules apply to them then to others.

Capitalism is great and all, but it should have its limits.

[techbeck]

Where were the defenders of capitalism when Microsoft was in a similar pickle? Just cause its Google?

Google has by far the largest marketshare in search within Europe and especially in several countries where Google is 90+% of the market.

And thus a monopoly. And other rules apply to them then to others.

Capitalism is great and all, but it should have its limits.

Nothing wrong with having a monopoly. Depends if Google is abusing their position which has to be proven.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competition_law

Competition law does not make merely having a monopoly illegal, but rather abusing the power that a monopoly may confer, for instance through exclusionary practices.

[siah1214]

Just cause its Google?

Yes.

According to many of the folks on this site, Google can do no wrong. Just because they use their monopoly to leverage their own tools doesn't mean that they're unfairly using their market dominance to crowd out competitors.