|
In the EU, the laws are applied very selectively, especially when it comes to applying laws in the UK
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
It's a different area of law, making such inane analogies does not work at all. Of course, companies with no presence are not under an equal amount of scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: making such inane analogies does not work at all
Why is it inane? It seems quite reasonable for me. Your original argument was that because Baidu and Yandex aren't popular, somehow the laws applied to Google shouldn't be applied to them.
Isn't that the same as saying that the regulations applied to Ford shouldn't be applied to, say, Rolls Royce?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
no but you prosecute the big boys and win, the small fry will behave, if you prosecute the minnows then Google will not take a blind bit of notice, in fact they probably wont take any notice even if they do get done
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote: if you prosecute the minnows
I don't really think that you can call Yandex or Baidu "minnows".
The fact is that the EU knows they'll get the finger if they try this with Russia or China - that's why they'll be left alone.
Just to add, I wasn't actually talking about prosecution either, but if the law says Google needs a banner then that same law would need to apply to all search engines surely? Or is the EU now in the business of making laws on a company-by-company basis?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Cars have to pass certain tests or else they cannot be imported/sold/registered/insured/etc.
Competition laws are applied when someone cares enough to take the trouble of doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: Cars have to pass certain tests or else they cannot be imported/sold/registered/insured/etc.
Correct. All cars. Not just ones from manufacturers who are doing well.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, all cars in the EU anyway.
But this is exactly the difference, not an argument for why there should be no difference. The difference just exists whether you like it or not.
|
|
|
|
|
All cars sold in the EU are subject to the same rules as each other.
Shouldn't all search engines used in the EU also be subject to the same rules as each other? That just seems like common sense to me..
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
They are subject to the same rules, but those are not the kind of rules that are applied by default all the time. They're rules that someone has to go out of their way to enforce, organizing committees and so on, and go through months (or years) of planning and researching, and then convince the EC (it's probably them, right?) that the issue matters enough to be worth their time.
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: They're rules that someone has to go out of their way to enforce, organizing committees and so on
Okay, fair enough. So now that someone has "gone out of their way", I can expect to see the same rule applied to all search engines, correct?
Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Brent Jenkins wrote: Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful US companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
FIFY
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote: Or is it more of a case (that I personally believe) that the EU targets only successful US and UK companies that it thinks it can get money out of?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Then someone would have to go out of their way again, for each of the search engines.. unlikely.
Obviously they're only going to target successful companies, that also makes sense from the perspective of maximum impact for the effort. Or they're doing it for the money, I haven't really decided yet.
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly where does it say they will not be prosecute?
start with one and they progress to the others, make sense to start with the biggest, and whilst the others may have a big global footprint their EU is very small, would not be surprised if Netscape is bigger
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote: Exactly where does it say they will not be prosecute?
I'm saying they won't prosecute. The EU only goes for the easy target. Yandex and Baidu will be left alone, I personally guarantee it
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
just exactly how many users use them within the EU? is it actually in double figures?
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Why does the number of users matter? The law either applies to all or it applies to nobody. If you're selectively applying a law, then it isn't a law, it's corruption.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
so you start with the biggest offender not someone virtually no one in the EU has heard of
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
If the same banners don't appear across all search engines, then we'll know what the EU's intentions were, won't we?
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
you think that if the EU win against google they wont chase the others? they have precedent and have defeated the most powerful
and no we wont because their are search engines that have such a small footprint as to make them irrelevant, now these may have a huge following in OTHER countries the EU is only concerned with the EU
it looks like you feel that Google shouldn't be held to account because some irrelevant search engine is also non compliant despite them being the Biggest offender!
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Bing? Yahoo?
The EU saw easy cash (in a time when it really needs cash - it's screwed as much as it thinks it can get from the UK for this year), so needs to look for other "donors".
Bergholt Stuttley Johnson wrote: it looks like you feel that Google shouldn't be held to account because some irrelevant search engine is also non compliant despite them being the Biggest offender!
I'm no fan of Google personally, but I don't like unfairness (perhaps it's a British thing?). Google should not be the only company subjected to this "rule".
There's a lot of corruption in many EU member countries and I think this is a symptom of this culture coming through.
Make a law an apply it to all, not just to those you think are worth shaking down.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
so you think that the EU should take on ALL the search engines AT ONCE? well that's not going to cost anything is it?
sense would say that if you cannot get them to agree without dragging them to court then you go after the biggest, this makes getting the others easier (if Google loses most will fall in line and any that don't will be extremely hard pressed to defend themselves in court)
if the EU loses then it just has the (big) bill for taking on Google and not 30+ other cases as well
and before you suggest taking on a small one first do you think the EU winning against a minnow would persuade Google to change (it never has in the past)
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think the EU should take on any search engine. If they want, they can introduce a law or industry regulation and enforce it across the board.
They do the same with everything else: banking, manufacturing, agriculture, etc. It's a shakedown, plain and simple. Nothing to do with laws or regulations.
I'll add that I think that the EU has bigger issues to deal with than silly banners on a single website. I'd prefer UK law to be making the decisions for us in the UK to be honest.
And end users won't benefit from yet another silly version of the "the internet uses cookies, do you accept?" type regulation that cost the industry millions for bugger all.
How do you know so much about swallows? Well, you have to know these things when you're a king, you know.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
They are only flowing the US practice of one law for locals and one for those foreign bods
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|