|
|
|
|
|
|
by simulo
1706 days ago
|
|
|
> They also tried to change regulations to suit them better. But they are allowed. They might be allowed. But just because it is legal does not mean that it is right, particularly as they themselves are "making their opinion known to the people who make the rules" and can excert economic pressure on lawmakers. And while their products might indeed be inferior – if they place their products as default on their own systems (android), buy themselves default placements on other products (Safari, Firefox…) many customers who do not try out all the options only use google’s products. And I can't blame them for not trying out all alternatives. |
|
|
Law is not just for right and wrong. Most laws and regulations are to further people's interests, like the google people submitting the documents. This is called freedom of speech. Legislators are free to not read them.
> excert economic pressure on lawmakers
I don't think this means what you think it means. To exert economic pressure on a lawmaker (a person) means to make them to personally lose money in some way. This is a pretty grave accusation - it means "if you don't agree with us, we are going to damage you financially. Google has not being caught attacking people financially, or threatening them, or even paying off lawmakers thus far.
Google is also allowed to place their products in their own systems by default (not android, which is open source). If you buy a Samsung phone, Samsung picks the defaults - some are google, some are Samsung, some may be the carrier you bought the phone from. Of course if google makes the Pixel, it's going to have google's defaults. Are you surprised when you buy an LG TV, LG also makes the remote, despite plenty of other brands of remotes available for that TV and others?
As far as buying themselves default search placement within other products? Have you been to the grocery store? Did you know every brand you see there pays for better shelf space and placement?
There is literally zero wrong with any of what is going on here. Plenty of bad things about google. This ain't one of them. This is them purposely damaging their product for some of the possible market. Which is their choice. They are not "gimping the web" - they are simply making their own products worse. If google's search wasn't a good default choice in a firefox (it is), firefox would take google's payoff, decline in use and lose marketshare, and in lose turn google's money since they don't have market share anymore. And firefox is free to do that.