Try selling your game by uploading videos on dailymotion and not YouTube.
Just try.
The Antitrust Implications of Google Stadia are Dire and No One is Questioning it. *Not a Single Journalist has Covered it.*
- Thread starter Deleted member 8752
- Start date
Try selling your game by uploading videos on dailymotion and not YouTube.
Just try.
If you think there is a concern here, you can always bring it up with the relevant agencies. :)
For example, Google today was fined 1.5 billion EUR for abusive practices in online advertising.
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-19-1770_en.htm
For example, Google today was fined 1.5 billion EUR for abusive practices in online advertising.
http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-19-1770_en.htm
Hence why he was the guy picked to be the talking head for content creators at yesterday's reveal.
Ha ha. That's a good one. Unless you live in China the options aren't forced on you.
Google's reach has to be examined but anti-trust rules in the US have been reinterpreted to look at it from the viewpoint of how it hurts the consumer (https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/02/20/696342011/antitrust-2-the-paradox)
Peltz what you are asking for technically is for businesses to be defended from Google's monopolistic potential because it is them who has to deal with the actual financial costs. We as consumers have to deal with the burdens to our privacy that Google places on us with increasing power.
how do you think google got so big in the first place OP? Or microsoft?
MS owns the OS your running your computer on, google owns the search engines you search for things on.
MS owns the OS your running your computer on, google owns the search engines you search for things on.
OP, you're not going to convince an American audience — that's been indoctrinated with Bork's take on anti-trust — that anything that doesn't directly and immediately harm consumers is a problem.
Beyond search and youtube, how about the fact that Google, Microsoft, and Amazon are the only companies in existance that can truely compete in this space because they have special access to their server infrastructure. Its not good when a company like Sony (HUGE) is too small to compete in the space.
That's not how antitrust works. It doesn't have to be the only choice, just owning the majority of the market (which Google definitely owns in both cases).
I'm a software engineer and while I'm not a web developer myself, those who I work with have a very straightforward and non-biased reason for coding for Chrome...it actually allows you to debug your code unlike other browsers...at least that's what they've told me.
It's a new service, of course we will talk the shit outta it.
Except browser war is borderline antitrust.
Microsoft tried to force users to install Google Edge and Google lost their shit. Alternatively, Firefox and Microsoft Edge are way behind Chrome, and not because Google keeps forcing them to be outdated and not working well with their products, products that billions of people use. Microsoft stopped fighting and is now embracing Chrome, and Firefox is fighting the good fight that they cannot win because everyone uses Chrome in their phones and associate that with the internet.
Also, everything about Google is an antitrust issue honestly. They control the main way people search things on the internet and can sell their own stuff instead of competitors really easy.
This is just another thing on top of how terrible of an idea a super corp like Google is.
This is just another thing on top of how terrible of an idea a super corp like Google is.
It's a new service, of course we will talk the shit outta it.
Except browser war is borderline antitrust.
Microsoft tried to force W10 users to install Microsoft Edge, and Google lost their shit. Alternatively, Firefox and Microsoft Edge are way behind Chrome, and not because Google keeps forcing them to be outdated and not working well with their products, products that billions of people use. Microsoft stopped fighting and is now embracing Chrome, and Firefox is fighting the good fight that they cannot win because everyone uses Chrome in their phones and associate that with the internet.
I don't think "anti-trust laws" apply to Google(yet), but there are many valid arguments for breaking up big tech giants. It needs to happen soon, but history teaches that it won't.
Last time I checked every modern browser has a built-in debugger.
Remember when people were worried that Microsoft would ruin competition on the internet with Internet Explorer built-into Windows?
That was a funny one.
Now Google is ruining Microsoft with their own web browser, their own OS, their own streaming services, their own web search engine, and now their own gaming service. And how about that Windows Phone, eh?
That was a funny one.
Now Google is ruining Microsoft with their own web browser, their own OS, their own streaming services, their own web search engine, and now their own gaming service. And how about that Windows Phone, eh?
You say that but the Spotify vs Apple thread was full of people who think Apple is being unfair. So far we haven't seen anything to indicate that this service will hurt competition.
Like I said, that's what I've heard. They may well be behind the times.
This is a fucking terrible idea. Nationalize a company that has access to millions of people's personal info around the world? So that the government now controls that? Geez, just fucking terrible, no offense
Heard from who? People who don't do web dev?
I mean Google just got 1.5b€ antitrust fine today, for third year in row. (4b€ last year, 2b€ in 2017)
and even after 7.5b€ google doesn't give fuck....
This is true. Firefox in fact are better than Chromes in some ways. (worse in some).
But the point is Sony and MS would basically be marketing games for Google. If Google starts eating their lunch they are gonna have to rethink the way they market games. And in most cases Google themselves could land these deals easily taking them away from them. Think about how many views video game trailers get and the amount of drama that comes from Youtube upvotes + downvotes. Think about how many trailers get mirrored. Youtube is ridiculously popular in this regard. Something like the Infinite Warfare debacle would actually be a case of bad PR is good PR. You could instantly play the game for the most downvoted video trailer in history of youtube.
Unless Google prevents information about these games landing on other platforms or blocks content for other platforms, I don't think they are breaking any laws. They purchased youtube and can do what they want with the site.
Though threads like this do highlight why I'm not a fan of any one company having too much power over the internet.
Though threads like this do highlight why I'm not a fan of any one company having too much power over the internet.
Didn't they just get fined 1.7 billion from the European commission today? I know that's unrelated but YouTube is huge and if they leverage it to suit their own platform then yes, that's a huge issue as they've made it clear they'll continue to use their status to give themselves an unfair advantage.
Easing barrier to entry is not anti competitive. Your suggestion that they will prioritise their own store in search results however is but we don't know if they will do that (doubt they will be so blatant).
I think there is some anti-trust concerns surrounding Youtube integration however. The cross synergies between YouTube and Stadia are huge and exclusivey favour Google...but that's because no one else has a similar capability on the market yet. Will they expose APIs to allow others e.g. Microsoft to integrate their streaming service with YouTube?
I think there is some anti-trust concerns surrounding Youtube integration however. The cross synergies between YouTube and Stadia are huge and exclusivey favour Google...but that's because no one else has a similar capability on the market yet. Will they expose APIs to allow others e.g. Microsoft to integrate their streaming service with YouTube?
Dude.... antitrust isnt the absence of competition but the dominance of it
Uh, that is what happened. Netscape died in less than a decade. Microsoft hijacked multiple open web standards and jammed ActiveX down everyone's throats.
Google wouldn't even exist if the US and EU hadn't cracked down on Microsoft. Not in the way it does today at least.
man, that's like nothing to Google. not even a half of a percentage point...
..that's like me getting a $50 fine and I had $50,000 in my bank account.
How would they? Like I said, I doubt Sony and MS are going to allow "Stream Now" on any videos on their channels, and they'll request the same of any third party partners, so that just leaves mirror videos which will probably also have the same stipulations. So then you're left with just influencer/youtuber channels, and like I showed before with my link, Twitch FAR outpaces Youtube in live streams. I don't think it'll be as pervasive as people think. You say Google could just land these deals, but we have no indication so far of Google landing any exclusive deals going by the presentation. It's too premature to assume the worst case scenario
I'm not sure "monopoly" is the best word for the issue. The general problem with these megacorporations is that they're so diversified that they affect nearly every aspect of our lives, while generally antitrust agencies only get involved if a company gets too dominant in one specific market or abuses their power to dominate a specific market.
OP
OP
Seriously... the ignorant takes in here. Google as a search engine is serving a market function, but isn't being neutral and even-handed about it. But that's not an argument about how big Google is. The problem is the non-neutrality of the platform, not the size.
That is an example of vertical anticompetitive behavior.
It's the same issue that Amazon has - purporting to be an open market place but placing its own products as no. 1 search results rather than basing them on a fair metric compared to third party sellers.
That is an example of vertical anticompetitive behavior.
It's the same issue that Amazon has - purporting to be an open market place but placing its own products as no. 1 search results rather than basing them on a fair metric compared to third party sellers.
Most of gaming journalists likely don't know what competition policy is.
?
There's something called abuse of dominant position. It's not a problem being big---it's a problem using the position of the company to kill competition.
?
There's something called abuse of dominant position. It's not a problem being big---it's a problem using the position of the company to kill competition.
Here's an interesting possibility: What if Microsoft wanted to add a "Play now" button on YouTube that launched xCloud rather than Stevia on the trailers on their own channel, but Google wouldn't allow it.
From my web developer co-workers...as I said...
A cursory look online shows that the general opinion has been that Chrome had the best dev tools even if it wasn't the only one for a long time. Seems Firefox has improved drastically recently, but many will stick with Chrome for a while just because that's what they're familiar with.
I'm not totally sure the 'link to play now' integration will necessarily take off - I mean don't lots of streamers depend on donations, suddenly people watching their feed are buying the games they're playing instead of dontating, if it means lost revenue they won't play along if that's the case. Also you have people watching streams don't necessarily want to play the game they're there to be passive and watch.
Though i think as a community we should be concerned about google being able to manipulate the views of people - the search engine alone is massive, gaming will thrive when it the best games rise to the top and sell well - and you only get there by having everyone get access to genuine impressions and reviews with people not having conflicts of interest; and reviewers keeping a distance from their subjects.
Though i think as a community we should be concerned about google being able to manipulate the views of people - the search engine alone is massive, gaming will thrive when it the best games rise to the top and sell well - and you only get there by having everyone get access to genuine impressions and reviews with people not having conflicts of interest; and reviewers keeping a distance from their subjects.
Indeed.
And Google was fined by the EC because it was favoring its partners on Google Shopping.
Investors don't care.
https://www.investors.com/news/technology/alphabet-stock-google-stock-eu-fine/
https://www.investors.com/news/technology/alphabet-stock-google-stock-eu-fine/
OP
OP