Forum Moderators: goodroi
Europe Readys Anti Trust Charges against Google
The E.U. is reportedly plotting a fine as large as $6.4 billion, roughly a tenth of Google’s annual revenue.
Europe’s antitrust regulator plans to file formal charges against Google Inc. for violating antitrust laws, a person familiar with the matter said Tuesday, stepping up a five-year investigation likely to become the biggest competition battle here since the European Union’s pursuit of Microsoft Corp. a decade ago.
The European Union will accuse Google on Wednesday of abusing its dominant position in Internet searches, opening the U.S. tech company up to a risk of massive fines and enforced changes in its business model, the Financial Times and Wall Street Journal said on Tuesday.
....accuse Google of breaching competition law by diverting traffic from rivals to favor its own services, said the FT, adding that some fellow commissioners had been concerned Vestager was narrowing the probe.
The Commission also continues to actively investigate Google's conduct with regard to the other three concerns (copying of rivals’ web content (known as 'scraping'), advertising exclusivity and undue restrictions on advertisers). The sending of a Statement of Objections in relation to comparison shopping does not in any way prejudge the outcome of the Commission's investigation of the other three concerns.
Here's something that appears to have been overlooked:The Commission also continues to actively investigate Google's conduct with regard to the other three concerns (copying of rivals’ web content (known as 'scraping'), advertising exclusivity and undue restrictions on advertisers). The sending of a Statement of Objections in relation to comparison shopping does not in any way prejudge the outcome of the Commission's investigation of the other three concerns.
This isn't a single issue problem for Google. The EC is moving on one aspect but there may be more to come.
I'm simply pointing out that Google's "shopping comparison service" is paid advertising.
Perhaps you're trying to say that anti trust laws should not be able to restrict the ability of a monopoly to insert advertising into a spot where competitor content *used* to exist, before they were demoted in the search results?
No, I'm saying what the average searcher would say: Search results shouldn't point to search results
So Scraping (we'll assume this is KG) is about fair use FACTS where there is no creative expression protected under copyright? Since SERPS data or Adwords isn't scraping. As an example [google.com...] are fair use facts that the competitors or rivals have no claim to in any part of the world.From what I remember of Computer/IP law, as a non lawyer, there is some protection on the content of databases in the EU ( [en.wikipedia.org...] ). It is a complex area. I'm not sure if this legislation has been superceded but there have been cases of scrapers being successfully prosecuted in civil cases. The US does not, I think, have this kind of database (a collection of facts) protection. The scraping issue could be a far deadlier one for Google but it may hinge on consent.
[edited by: fathom at 4:18 pm (utc) on Apr 20, 2015]
To bolster its own listings, Google sometimes copied, or “scraped,” information from rival sites. According to the FTC report, Google copied Amazon’s rankings of how well products were selling, then used that information to rank its results for product searches. Amazon declined to comment.
So Scraping (we'll assume this is KG) is about fair use FACTS where there is no creative expression protected under copyright?
Lifting large verbatim passages of text which OK would be/could be KG but I can't find an example of that.
Unfortunately for them Google will have to answer withing the existing framework.
Danny Sullivan has written an in-depth article that analyzes ...
In the end, the results are likely to be cosmetic changes to save face for the EC
Danny Sullivan is a US based SEO. Not sure I'd bet the farm on his analysis, as his background doesn't seem to have much to do with either the EU or antitrust.
There's also an article [nytimes.com] on the New York Times, written by someone with a law degree, and many years of experience covering antitrust cases. It's not nearly as flippant about the potential consequences.
It is an EU case. It is alleged that Google has infringed EU law.
The EC will provide the evidence to Google.
The focus on US law is not relevant.
The problem with Danny O'Sullivan. EditorialGuy, the SEO heads and the bloggers is that they just don't understand the situation.
In terms of scraping, EU copyright law is stricter and more defined, (the Database Directive mentioned earlier).
Arguably, Google's reuse of scraped data could constitute a derivative work. That's a whole world of hurt for Google and its maggotising KG.
Getting back to the aspect about which many pro-Google commentators in the media seem to be clueless, those EU directives are typically transposed into the national legislation of every EU member country.
The existing framework is EU legislation.
This is the text of the Database Directive. It could be a problem for Google.
[eur-lex.europa.eu...]
[edited by: fathom at 9:07 am (utc) on Apr 22, 2015]
(1) Whereas databases are at present not sufficiently protected in all Member States by existing legislation; whereas such protection, where it exists, has different attributes;
Concur... but EU courts have no jurisdiction over US databases and since the FTC failed to file any claims of US wrong doing to bolster an EU case is likely inadmissible. With that in mind and Google has very solid legal team that likely counselled them on EU law (all the countries) so while I agree with you here and I don't access uk.,de., etc. to seek if Google has indeed used even a sliver of database from there... I can only review what you all post and you all seem to be making bleeding heart US claims... why not UK claims or Germany claims. Are there any?
Sorry, I'm not a lawyer and I'm not pro-google or pro-EC or pro-EU I'm pro-me.Not you, Fathom. I meant that most of the pro-Google media do not understand that this is an EU case (the Antitrust one) and that the a scraping case would also be an EU one.
Posting legislative gibberish is meaningless. Where does it say that EU law overrides US Law ... I would be extremely interested in that.It is not legislative gibberish. Within the EU, EU legislation overrides US law. The legislation cited shows that an EU case over scraping may be far easier for the EU to win because there is so much standardised legislation protecting copyright and databases within the EU.
Or unless you can show (not you but anyone) a non-US database infringement done by Google I don't see where this is going...It is up to the European Commission of the EU to state which companies have been affected by Google's activities. Again it will, if the EC goes ahead with a case on scraping, probably rely on the financial aspect. Google operates in the EU and also makes money from advertising thus it could be argued that it is making money from the scraping activity.
Concur... but EU courts have no jurisdiction over US databases and since the FTC failed to file any claims of US wrong doing to bolster an EU case is likely inadmissible. With that in mind and Google has very solid legal team that likely counselled them on EU law (all the countries) so while I agree with you here and I don't access uk.,de., etc. to seek if Google has indeed used even a sliver of database from there... I can only review what you all post and you all seem to be making bleeding heart US claims... why not UK claims or Germany claims. Are there any?
In terms of scraping, the EU attempting to apply its legislation to a company outside the EU is possibly ultra-vires (essentially outside its jurisdiction).
Google right? I have no problem understanding that. Googlebot did the "alleged crime" from where ever it was launched.
It would depend on where the offence was committed. The EU would probably seek to apply it to EU companies that have had their data scraped.
Google also has companies within the EU so this complicates matters. If Google has scraped UK or German sites or sites from any other member country then the Database Directive might be applicable.If Googlebot crawled from these EU headquarters that would complicate matters. The fact that the headquarters are in EU is immaterial. IMHO
Posting legislative gibberish is meaningless. Where does it say that EU law overrides US Law ... I would be extremely interested in that.
It is not legislative gibberish. Within the EU, EU legislation overrides US law. The legislation cited shows that an EU case over scraping may be far easier for the EU to win because there is so much standardised legislation protecting copyright and databases within the EU.
I concur.Or unless you can show (not you but anyone) a non-US database infringement done by Google I don't see where this is going...
It is up to the European Commission of the EU to state which companies have been affected by Google's activities. Again it will, if the EC goes ahead with a case on scraping, probably rely on the financial aspect. Google operates in the EU and also makes money from advertising thus it could be argued that it is making money from the scraping activity.
This is the problem as I see it. The "alleged crime" occurred where ever the database was hosted. The long arm of EU courts can only reach their EU borders. IMHOThe legal rights exist for the database.
If Googlebot crawled from these EU headquarters that would complicate matters. The fact that the headquarters are in EU is immaterial. IMHONo. The main thing for the European Commission to prove would be that the rights of the database owners have been infringed by Google. This is a very messy thing and the EC will spend a lot of time getting it right before moving (if they do). Google has companies in the EU and they are, via Adwords, potentially profiting from this, as yet hypothetical, activity. It is always about the money.
This is the problem as I see it. The "alleged crime" occurred where ever the database was hosted. The long arm of EU courts can only reach their EU borders. IMHO
The legal rights exist for the database.
If Googlebot crawled from these EU headquarters that would complicate matters. The fact that the headquarters are in EU is immaterial. IMHO
No. The main thing for the European Commission to prove would be that the rights of the database owners have been infringed by Google.
This is a very messy thing and the EC will spend a lot of time getting it right before moving (if they do). Google has companies in the EU and they are, via Adwords, potentially profiting from this, as yet hypothetical, activity. It is always about the money.
