Technology

Break up Google.

Browser is one company. YouTube is another. The search a third company. The ad one has to be the richest and should be it's own.

Then once you cut down Google into manageable companies, go after Facebook.

You're right - this is very reminiscent of the Microsoft Antitrust suit of 1998. Technically, per that ruling, Google could be subject to an AT&T style breakup. However, it's pertinent to note that on appeal, the Justice Department chose to settle with Microsoft on the issue of splitting the company rather than go back to trial.

Clearly, in the real world, the ruling didn't stick, as today Microsoft, Apple, and Google all package their browsers on their operating systems. As such, I don't think it likely that enforcing an API standard would exceed the current antitrust abuses that we've come to accept as a fact of daily life, and highly unlikely to attract a serious case from the Justice Department.

That being said, I fully support your effort - we've needed stronger antitrust enforcement for a long time, and AT&T shouldn't have been the high watermark of the Justice Department's efforts in this arena.

hah, this person thinks antitrust legislation is actually enforced

Ok, guys I'm going to try to organize some community action about all of this over on the community I made on !organize@lemmy.world. Specifically in this thread, I'd like to work on actions like crafting the letter we'd to send to the FTC as well as the letters we're going to send to the EFF and Louis Rossmann. If you're interested in collaborating on all this or just following the action, please join the community and keep up with the thread. I'm considering creating a sister Discord or Matrix. And it would anathema to the cause to use Google Docs to collaborate on writing this e-mail, but I figure we can use OnlyOffice (https://www.onlyoffice.com/) or Etherpad (https://etherpad.org/) instead.

Are you guys in?

I never left Firefox, and I will never understand, why people were so quick to adopt Chrome which was Google controlled from the start. Google was already an obvious problem at the time (2008).

Google never had an interest in building the best browser for users. They are not a browser company, they are an advertiser. What they wanted is the best browser for Google, meaning the best browser for delivering advertising. They only made the best browser to attract users with no political foresight. That is becoming more and more obvious. Google has been trying to kill Firefox for a while, by making parts of their services not work quite as intended. While if you changed your user agent, it would work fine!

Another place here today, we can read how Google is trying to kill Jpeg XL or JXL, which is a superior graphics format to JPG PNG and GIF wrapped into 1. https://lemmy.world/post/2059816

Firefox really helped protect the Internet and Internet users from the shenanigans of Microsoft. It should come as no surprise, that Google wants to control the Internet, just as much as Microsoft did, from a pure business perspective, that's an obvious move, and our best defense is still Mozilla and Firefox and lawmakers that aren't corrupt. So don't elect trump to get another Ajit Pai who has no bigger wish than to kill net neutrality.

Anti-trust lawsuits only happen when companies forget to pay their politicians.

Corporations are finding that the vocal minority is small enough that they can let them complain all they want, and nothing will change. There are now enough users out there that it just doesn't matter what how much we complain online. They just have to wait it out since the silent majority just don't care anymore.

Reddit, Netflix, Spotify, and now Google. It's happening everywhere lately.

P.S. If any lawyers and people really knowledgeable about web technologies and standards here on Lemmy can get together and help us draft something together that we can all send in, that would be amazing.

Big corporations have been battling for control of the internet through browser market share since day one. We can't let any one corpo gain control because it will destroy it with proprietary standards, it's already suffered untold damage. MS almost got control when IE reached a vast majority of market share. Google is in the same place now with Chrome.

As consumers we have some control over market share through product selection. Of course an anti-trust lawsuit will help the cause as it did when MS was in position to take control. Time for Firefox to take the stage now, it's ready.

The thing is that in the eyes of the general populace (and regulators) it's not "just a Google thing" since Chromium is open source and a majority of browsers use that. So the argument is that most browsers will implement anything Google does and make it a de-facto standard.

For eu users : https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/procedures/complaints_en

However not sure how it works, if you need to be directly affected as a company of user, or if you need to be a citizen to file a complaint.

I don't have the necessary detail and information to be able to file the complaint.

If you give the detail on how it works and why it affects competition I may be able to file a complaint.

Howerver from what I saw in news the EU and US are already collaborating in an investigation against Google. Not sure if it's true, current and on what exactly.

Louis Rossman did a video recently and I completely agree with him. He said that regulars/normies especially 9-5s won't use Firefox as long the changes dont affect them personally.

TLDR,: We're fucked

It's only an anti-trust violation if an anti-trust case is made and a sentence passed. A new Chrome update and a couple Benjamins on the adequate courts should easily fix that,.

Laws only apply to the little people.

Probably. But most companies have adopted a "do it now and ask for forgiveness later" policy it seems. For proof, look no further than class-action lawsuits. Those aren't punishments, it's just the cost of doing business.

They hate the idea of a free and open web.

Hey all, so along with this post, today, I made a couple of communities geared towards starting and organizing a movement like the one in this post that has us working together to petition our government for redress on the anticompetitive behavior by the Google Chrome monopoly. I messaged Ruud and reached out to c/support because I have no idea what I'm doing and where or when it's appropriate to advertise the community and I'm looking for guidance. So if it's inappropriate here, mods of c/Technology, I apologize and please delete this comment.

But here are the two communities I made: !movement@lemmy.world !organize@lemmy.world

I want them to be a place where we can pull together like minded individuals of Lemmy and perhaps the Fediverse/ActivityPub together about a cause we care about and want to create a movement for. I figure c/movement will be were you can gather those folks c/organize is where you can have discussions and organize to take action. Perhaps there should be an associated matrix or discord channel for the second one.

I'd like both communities to be community owned and community-led. So on big decisions and deciding the guidelines, I'd like the community to call the shots while mods would do the heavy lifting of enforcing those guidelines and organizing things to where the community's voice can be heard (so for example, after having a discussion about guidelines, consolidating all of that into some sort of vote if there needed to be one on finally voting in the new guidelines). Anyways, rather than having a discussion about the communities here, let's have them over on the c/support thread (https://lemmy.world/post/2061735) or the communities themselves.

And the thing is we all have jobs, classes, family or something else entirely having claims to our attention and time, but we shouldn't give up or give in. Let's still figure out a way to persevere.

I'm not sure that can really be considered antitrust even though it is an issue. Even if Chrome adds new features for themselves, the specs are open and there's nothing preventing competitors from implementing them, unlike IE back in the days with ActivX applets and all the proprietary undocumented Windows-only features. Those were intentionally designed to be proprietary and hard to match by competitors. Many Chromium derivatives will also keep manifest v2 alive as well.

It would be antitrust if they made sure that you have to use Chrome for sites to work, like many sites would only work on IE back then and not even IE-compatible implementations. Google's been pretty reasonable implementing fallbacks for their own services, everything Google works just fine on Firefox. Sometimes not optimally, but they do make an effort to at least keep it fairly compatible and they don't do user agent tests, they do feature tests so competing browsers are never outright excluded. And nothing stopping developers from making sure everything works fine on Firefox for their own website.

And unlike IE, Chromium is open-source. Competitors can easily take Chromium and change it to their liking like Microsoft did with Edge. The engine has market share dominance sure, but there's no locking down forcing you to use Google Chrome specifically. You can use Brave, Edge, Bromite, Opera and any other Chromium forks if you want and give nothing to Google.

Otherwise Windows is a much worse antitrust violation purely for being the most popular OS and therefore people write software mostly for Windows. Some would argue it should, and I would agree, but again there's nobody forcing you to make your software Windows-exclusive other than laziness.

Whether this goes through or not do not forget to give every effort to remove google search from your organization if you can. Setting even default home pages to DuckDuckGo and using that as the default search in the settings can have massive impacts.