Mr Almunia, how many more times can Google rewrite Euro search 'dominance' settlement? On 30 November 2014, the European Commission will have been probing Google's search business practices for a whopping four years. Formal proceedings were opened against the ad giant in late 2010. The date is significant, given that by then we should also know who will replace antitrust boss Joaquin Almunia in Brussels. As …
The way it looks to me, it's not that Almunia finds Google's proposition insufficient and is giving to Google yet another chance. It's rather that every time he declares himself satisfied, and every time he faces a barrage of complaints through every channel asking him to demand more from Google, or if possible, drop the whole settlement idea.
What is happening now is not that Google gets another chance to revise its offer, it's that the competitors get another chance to complain. Almunia has not even asked Google to change anything at this moment.
And the fun part is that even though this has been four years, it is the fast process. If Almunia eventually decides to go with the flow and start an antitrust investigation of Google, we'll still be waiting for the end in ten years.
Almunia's problem is managing EU politics. Stooges of the French and German political left have hands on throttle of the EU train-wreck in the making. Either they get the rest of the EU aboard or the EU will dissolve in chaos.
Harassing Google is popular with Hollande's supporters and a German/French version of the Intra-EU net would suit them. Let them build it on their own. After Google encrypts everything, gives users the encryption keys to their data on an App by App basis, un-bundles Apps with APIs suitable for any App with suitable data security/privacy options, the French/German intranet consortium will float a $300B IPO for their taxpayers to pick up. In the mean time Internet 2.0, made in America will not accept Atari-internet Apps made by the Fair Play Consortium because of the Swiss Chesey data security.
I often wonder in cases like this if there is actually any point in even starting them. By the time the investigation comes to a conclusion the damage has been done and the market has invariably moved on. Even if they go down the route of fining Google it won't make any difference they'll just pay up (eventually) and business will go on as usual. If the fine was made large enough to make them stop and think they would probably just pull out of Europe and be even more evil. I'm not saying I know what the solution is but to repeatedly do something that doesn't work (and costs a lot of money) is crazy.
Google has been given three separate chances to revise its concessions on search, in part, because Almunia has stuck so firmly to favouring such an outcome that, he argues, will restore competition more swiftly than forcing the multinational down a so-called Statement of Objections route.
Do we really need to restore competition? Why is that the business of the EU? If we all prefer Google, are they going to force some people to use Bing, or Yahoo?
Search is contestable, and economics tells us that we don't have to worry about a contestable monopoly. If Google start to really misbehave or if someone else comes up with a better product, then Google's days are numbered. In the meantime, can we not just let them get on with what they're doing (providing a search service that 90% of Europeans think is better than any of the alternatives)?
(I still remember using AllTheWeb back in the good old days of university - wonder what happened to them...)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
