|
The only thing you missed is that the basic premise is to make sure massive fines are levied against non-EU based corporations.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
They wouldn't dare take on Baidu or Yandex though because they're looking for:
a) No repercussions, and
b) High net worth
Nothing at all to do with consumers or fair trade, just about getting hands on easy cash.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Baidu and Yandex are irrelevant in the EU anyway. Google has over 90% of the market.
|
|
|
|
|
So in the EU, do only popular cars require seat belts?
The law can't be selectively applied - either it's the law or it's not and it applies to 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Brent Jenkins wrote: The law can't be selectively applied
You joking, right? In international relations the "law" is always "selectively applied". And whoever has the louder TV - wins.
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|