Hacker News Reader

Comment by ehllo | Hacker News Reader

It is not about the right to appear in Google's search results. It is about abusing market dominance to put competing businesses at disadvantage. There are also other running/solved cases/investigations against Google.

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cf...

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm?fusea...

View on HN

You're strongly implying some kind of targeting by Google. Whereas the parent comments above you indicate simply a lack of caring by ProtonMail to improve its ranking or a lack of free general support by Google to any website that happens, not just ProtonMail.

Asking Google to be responsive to any website demanding special treatment for higher search rankings is unreasonable. Best practices are published and tools are available. It's hard to see monopolistic abuse there.

The only difference is that Gmail (and other Google products) are listed when you, shockingly, go to google.com. Are you saying Google can't mention Google products on google.com? Do you think gmail is somehow not as popular as it is and wouldn't rate the #1 spot for searches for email?

Promising to provide tech support and troubleshooting to every website in the world for free is a lot to ask of a search engine, even if they're the dominant market leader.

Sooner or later Google will probably regulated akin to other "utilities", at least in some jurisdictions.

You say that, but we can't even get Internet as a utility currently. I'm not disagreeing, I'm just saying something as basic as internet is being abused "for profit", search being made into a utility sounds vastly more difficult.

I like to think we are indeed slowly progressing, but at the same time it's clear that companies in power are "progressing" too. I'm unsure if humanitarian goals like this are possible if we regard them as "sooner or later it'll happen".

Interesting thought nonetheless.

it only is abusing if they push their products before others, if you fail to rank highly in search results whose fault is that?

are we going to use the IE solution, but instead now force it on providers whom you have to voluntarily choose over another to provide selected results? who gets to choose who appears?

> it only is abusing if they push their products before others, if you fail to rank highly in search results whose fault is that?

Well, if that failure to rank highly is due to Google manually removing you, I think it's fairly clear whose fault it is.

(It's Google's.)

No it isn't. If you want to ensure that you're in the search results then you're supposed to buy an ad.

Edit: To everyone downvoting, can you explain why you expect to be provided guaranteed service from a business that you have no business relationship with?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com