Re:Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo
by jhall1468 on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @04:45PM
(#18668034)
There is nothing illegal about a monopoly. A monopoly that uses it's position to prevent competition is illegal. Giving DDG a very valuable domain name (given their name) absolutely does what you're saying it doesn't.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo
by Gatsky on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @05:15PM
(#18668209)
How is not giving the domain name to DDG using their monopoly to suppress competitors? This is not equivalent to say, removing DDG from their search results.
Re:Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo
by cstrahan on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @06:21PM
(#18668589)
I don't think that's what they're saying. The point isn't that withholding the domain name is the end of the world, the point is that handing it over is a small token that Google can use to claim that they aren't anti-competitive. I don't know what my stance is on that interpretation, but that seems to be (to me) to be the intended interpretation.
Does that make sense?
Re:Google transferred ownership of Duck.com to DuckDuckGo
by PhasmaFelis on Wednesday December 12, 2018 @08:21PM
(#18669168)
That's not what they're saying. If/when the feds come after Google for (most likely unrelated) monopolistic suppression, Google can say "we don't suppress our competitors--look how we helped out DDG!"