jontcalho

First the term "stifling monopoly" is loaded, and they definitely don't have it in Russia. 2nd they can't have a "stifling monopoly" since they are just another node on the graph, you don't need them to "internet", there is always another site, another app.

Google seems to be singled out and especially targeted by these antitrust allegation and investigations, I mean in the larger sense not just here where it's mostly a protectionist outcome as the fact that they technically don't have a "dominant market position" at ~50% market share is the least of it.

I'm curious How a ruling like that gels with the fact that on an iPhone (the other half of the market) all services and apps are dictated by Apple and can not be altered, while on Android not only they can be but the whole OS is free, Yandex could have commissioned their own hardware like many others do and they curiously haven't complained about Apple.

Same goes for the search allegation,the argument there is that Google should feature results from other search engines on their own site! Which is mind Boggling, no one is convinced Facebook or twitter or anyone should include content from other website but somehow Google is different. Google isn't the network layer that one must go through it to interact with the web, they are no "gatekeeper" not technically or metaphorically yet somehow politicians are convinced they are.

This seems like field distortion to me that somehow regulator were sold on to (even excluding this Russian example).