News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on US vs. Google Amicus Curiae Brief of Y Combinator in Support of Plaintiffs [pdf]. Parent comment

Re:US vs. Google Amicus Curiae Brief of Y Combinator in Supp... by dreghgh on Sunday May 11, 2025 @03:27AM (#43952064)
You can't have the Play app store on your Android phone unless you accept to install Youtube, Google Maps, Google Drive and Google Photos. This is clearly anti-competitive.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US vs. Google Amicus Curiae Brief of Y Combinator in Supp... by scarface_74 on Sunday May 11, 2025 @11:25AM (#43954447)
That line of reasoning didn’t work out to well against Microsoft. No there was no browser choice screen in the US and no forced unbundling.

If enough users choose Chrome willingly on the desktop to make it the majority, do you think unbundling is going to help some scrappy startup hosting video at scale with all of the associated cost is going to arise instead of everyone just downloading YouTube?

Google Drive has plenty of competition and it’s not even the majority.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US vs. Google Amicus Curiae Brief of Y Combinator in Supp... by dreghgh on Sunday May 11, 2025 @02:42PM (#43955975)
Your two arguments contradict each other. Bundling YouTube is fine because there are no viable competitors. Bundling Google Drive is fine because there are plenty of viable competitors.

If Chrome was able to compete in a level playing field, then so should the other Google services. You seem to believe that Google makes an effort to tie together its services because they are stupid and don't realise they are not gaining anything from it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:US vs. Google Amicus Curiae Brief of Y Combinator in Supp... by scarface_74 on Sunday May 11, 2025 @06:22PM (#43957665)
There are no viable options for user distributed video? Ever heard of TikTok? Facebook? Instagram? Your own website?
[ Parent | on HN ]