|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 14 2012 @ 11:27 AM EDT |
pj,
apoloigies for my formatting and spelling on ipad...
i like foss because it serves mankinds needs more efficiently and fast than
closed monopoly solutions.
i am of the opinion that google is much more open than apple, and apple
is a bit more open than microsoft.
we, humanity, will suffer if we allow entrenched closed monopolies to slow
down overall decelopment, leading to war and famine in the long run.
google is fighting this and is smart enough as an organization to anticipate
the response.
we need to help them with ideas. they have the money and pr.
first obvious thing: boost up bing and yahoo in their search results. include
option for bing and yahoo ingoogle search bar and in chrome. no one will
use it, but it is bending over backwards to prevent false accusations.
in the end if left to the natural course without political bribes, foss wins.
it
has already won in the cloud. look at amaxon aws and ec2. the default is
linux. look at wikimedia browser stats. chrome and firefox together
dominate internet explore and safari. and look at mobile smart phones.
microsoft and apple fight humanity by using ip lockin to prevent choice.
google and amazon encourage choice.
i'm pro-choice in this sense, leaving unrelated politics out of it. so are all
reasonable human beings who dont have a selfish profit interest.
apple and microsoft are anti-choice, and like the mafia dont care how
many people will starve because of drugs that wont be invented or food
produced so they can support their private profit.
we have to help google as they are our best champion.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: albert on Sunday, October 14 2012 @ 12:40 PM EDT |
FYI, Re: Jon Liebowitz, FTC Chairman:
"...In the private sector, Leibowitz served most recently as Vice President
for Congressional Affairs for the Motion Picture Association of America – from
2000 to 2004 – and worked as an attorney in private practice in Washington from
1984 to 1986. ..." ftc.com
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: pem on Sunday, October 14 2012 @ 12:49 PM EDT |
| PJ:
The FTC is a part of the executive branch. The head executive is the
president. One mechanism for seeking redress is the process at petitions.whitehouse.gov .
I
would suggest perhaps a members-only thread where we can create and debate a
succinct, powerful petition to get the FTC to back off.
Once you get the
petition set up, and then discuss it in a public article, you would have lots of
signers sign it immediately.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 16 2012 @ 10:27 AM EDT |
As the number one search engine, Google does have a monopoly, although not
necessarily an illegal monopoly. But, as a monopoly, it becomes more difficult
to add capabilities without disadvantaging competitors in what might be seen as
unfair ways. For example, if one searches for an airport to an airport, the
Google ticket search results come first, followed by other on-line travel agents
and airlines. While Google doesn't handle the booking, I'm sure the airline or
travel agent which does handle the booking pays a commission to Google. Is this
a separate business for Google, and is it separately profitable from the
commission they get, or would they get more from companies paying to be listed
higher? I don't know the answer, but this is the kind of thing which can start
lawsuits.
I worked for a regulated monopoly for several years at the start of my career,
Ma Bell. The service providers were regulated monopolies, but the captive
equipment company, Western Electric, was not regulated. So, the service
providers would pay for extremely long service lives with a corresponding
overhead, which would enable that high cost equipment to be placed into the
rate-of-return monopolies. Ma Bell benefited two ways - high profit on the
equipment sales, and a higher base for the rate-of-return service. Ultimately,
the government forced splitting up the monopoly, and I think we all benefited
(well, maybe not the former employees of Ma Bell).
These are the type of things monopolies can do - manipulate pricing, and
undercut small competitors or practice predatory pricing to eliminate
competition. While the predatory pricing is going on, consumers love it, as they
get products and services for under cost. But, once the competitor is gone, the
prices go through the roof.
I'm sure Google has good legal advice to try to keep on the correct side of the
line. But, the line isn't always crystal clear, and competitors will do all they
can to move the line to make it seem as if Google has gone past the line. In
general though, one wonders what the FTC is doing enforcing anti-trust rather
than Justice. Apparently, some congress members share that same question, which
I'm sure is the result of Google trying to push the line in the other direction.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
