Print 39 comment(s) - last by Flunk.. on Mar 16 at 9:34 AM

Google has no chance to avoid fine merely by promising change, unlike in the EU, U.S.

In the U.S., Google Inc. (GOOG) managed to plead its case successfully enough that the antitrust accusations regarding its search engine only led to a small fine.  In Europe, regulators forced it to make changes, but it also appears ready to escape without any major punitive fines given its willingness to cooperate and tweak its more controversial strategies.
I. Five BILLION Dollars
But the American internet and mobile software giant isn't out of the woods yet.  The world's largest search engine and mobile operating system maker's latest headache comes courtesy of The Competition Commission of India (CCI), a government regulatory body of the southern Asian nation who is examining local and international complaints carefully.
[Image Source:]

The CCI says that a local matchmaking service claims it was damaged by Google's anticompetitive tactics.
The accusation is similar to that lofted against Google in past cases.  The basic allegation is that Google -- which controls a majority of customer search traffic -- is overriding its own algorithms such that the best services are bumped down in the search results, making them less used and harder to find.  Google in turn is said to give prominent positions to its own in-house offerings, locking customers (to an extent) in its profit loop (unless they want to go out of their way to dig into the pages of other results).
Google has come under increasing scrutiny in India after the local Muslim minority has noisily protested against the search engine returning in the search results websites with insulting images of their Prophet Mohammed.  Some have demanded the search engine results be censored.

Google India
[Image Source: GlobalPost]

But the competition question has grown into a far more dangerous issue for Google in the region.
The Consumer Unity & Trust Society -- aka, "CUTS International" -- also filed a similar complaint.  While the efforts in Europe were largely steered by Microsoft Corp. (MSFT), a major U.S. rival of Google, CUT Int'l is equally critical [see this, for example] to both companies. The UN and other global advocacy groups back it.
Indian law allows for very stiff antitrust penalties.  Namely, it allows a maximum fine of 10 percent of a company's 3-year average profit.  Google has brought in $49.3B USD in 3 years, so that indicates a maximum fine of nearly $5B USD.
While past settlements and negotiations suggest Google will be able to placate Indian officials, such a fine could set records previously held by the billions in fines by the EU against Microsoft and Intel Corp. (INTC).
II. No Chance to Settle
India's, says the case has some unique elements, though, which may make it more costly for Google.  Comments the site's legal counsel Ferida Satarawala:

Google's unfair use of trademarks as well as its retaliatory conduct are not specifically addressed in the European settlement and are distinct theories of harm being pursued by the CCI. Therefore, this settlement is unlikely to address CCI's concerns in our case.

The complaint is current being looked into by India's Director General of Foreign Trade (DG).  The DG is seeking input from other third parties (e.g. Microsoft) who might have a bone to pick with Google's tactics, as well.  After that, the CCI will likely look to formally charge Google and pursue a fine.

Interestingly, authorities indicate Google will not be able to settle the complaints by promising to change.  While it will face more fines for continuing offenses, the fines will be decided based on the court's analysis of what Google has already done.  Also interesting is that the court has the power to break Google India up into "Structural Entities", forcing the company to abandon key portions of its Indian business.

Google, for its part, has long seemed resigned that it may be found eventually to have done something wrong.  To that end it's set aside $750M USD in an antitrust settlement buffer, a cash reserve that thus far has remained mostly untapped.

A Google spokesperson said in a statement that they are "extending full co-operation" to the Indian authorities, pointing to past antitrust settlements.

Source: The Financial Times

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By inighthawki on 3/10/2014 11:18:33 PM , Rating: 2
Allow me to provide a counter example in the form of an auto reference:

Generally people are overwhelmingly pleased with Tesla . Obviously this is the case, because other auto makers barely get any sales compared to Tesla .

See, the above statement is false. The model S has on average the highest ranking score of any vehicle, yet Ford, as an example, sells way more cars.

By inighthawki on 3/10/2014 11:20:19 PM , Rating: 2
To be clear: I'm not disagreeing with you. I prefer Google's search engine over others. I just want you to realize that your two statements don't actually have any relation.

PS. Also sorry for posting this separately, for some reason DT thought my post was spam because of the way I worded this, which was stupid, so I cut it out and tried to rephrase it a bunch. Appanrelty calling something the 'best search engine' directly is spam or something...

By Wazza1234 on 3/11/2014 6:51:01 AM , Rating: 1
You're absolutely right.

On top of that, even if he was correct that people were pleased overall with Google, even to the point where they think it's the best search engine, that doesn't mean they can't also complain about anti-competitive search results.

So multiple flaws with the logic. Plus the demonstrations which are pictured in this article are clearly carried out by unhappy people.

By NellyFromMA on 3/11/2014 11:13:07 AM , Rating: 3
No, you aren't allowed to have your own opinion when it comes to GOOGLE! If you search with Google, you must ENJOY IT IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY for fear of being apprised of your inferiority for thinking on your own and deciding for yourself what you do and don't enjoy about a particular service and/or vendor.

It's the Android way! The fans are substantially different from Apple's, can't you tell?

By Reclaimer77 on 3/11/2014 7:22:34 PM , Rating: 2
Nice try, I and several others said the same thing about the EU vs. Microsoft nonsense.

This isn't about loyalty to Google, it's about examples of poor Governance and extremist protectionist policies that haven't adapted to the digital age.

But whatever, troll on.

By inighthawki on 3/11/2014 11:13:45 AM , Rating: 2
Actually I made a mistake myself. Just re-read my initial post - I said correlation and that is not what I wanted to say. The absolutely is a correlation in the data, but the two statements are unrelated, to be more simply put. There is no causal relationship between the statements.

By Reclaimer77 on 3/11/2014 4:29:18 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see any problem with my "logic". Google is the most used search engine by a massive margin, nobody is forcing people to use it, and if they weren't pleased there are viable alternative they can seek out.

Exactly what is the problem with this train of thought?

Also consider this, the default search engine of Internet Explorer, the default browser for every install of Windows on the planet, uses Bing. And Google is STILL beating Bing by a huge margin. Meaning people are actively changing defaults and seeking Google.

How can you tell me consumer choice isn't king here?

I just want you to realize that your two statements don't actually have any relation.

And, again, you haven't explained how this is the case.

By inighthawki on 3/12/2014 12:33:01 AM , Rating: 3
You're argument is a logical fallacy. It has no causal relationship. It is what would be known as a false-cause fallacy. A lack of traffic on other 'A' is not evidence supporting 'B' being better. This is why I had to apologize above since I originally stated 'correlation' because I responded too quickly without reading what I wrote.

Google's popularity can be based on a number of differing factors including the quality of the search results, the accessibility of the service, the brand's image (i.e. as a status symbol), favoritism, convenience, familiarity, etc.

This was directly proven using my counter example above. Any argument that has a counter example is not factually correct.

To illustrate my Tesla example a bit more: Tesla is considered one of if not the most high quality consumer vehicle on the market. Assume for the sake of argument that they are at least better quality than a Ford. Tesla is still less popular than Ford for various reasons, namely price, but also the fact that they are less well known, and don't have an existing image in the eyes of the general public.

"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Laptop or Tablet - Which Do You Prefer?
September 20, 2016, 6:32 AM
Update: Samsung Exchange Program Now in Progress
September 20, 2016, 5:30 AM
Smartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki