Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Basically Pays Apple to Stay Out of the Search Engine Business, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can Google pay Apple so people can stop using Apple Maps? Someone that was meeting me ended up being an hour late and provided screen shot updates of Apple Maps navigation along the way. Turned out it directed the person to take surface street instead of freeway parallel to it. Not the first time Apple Maps is seen preferring slower surface street vs clear freeway.
Search isn't as important as it used to be for an awful lot of people. We have used the internet long enough to know where the things that interest us are and have lots of bookmarks to prove it.
I might use a search engine once a week these days when I'm researching a character that isn't in somewhere like Wikipedia.
Oh, and it is even better not to use a search engine where the front page of results consists of paid for answers mostly from the likes of Google and Amazon. The fewer hits that I give those two companies the better.
I might use a search engine once a week these days when I'm researching a character that isn't in somewhere like Wikipedia.
Oh, and it is even better not to use a search engine where the front page of results consists of paid for answers mostly from the likes of Google and Amazon. The fewer hits that I give those two companies the better.
So Google pays Apple to be the DEFAULT search engine. But consumers can directly go to (and bookmark) any search engine they like with any web browser on MacOS. Plus, if I go into Safari Preferences and choose Search, there is a pulldown menu that allows me to select and designate any one of four other search engines that are not Google. I simply don't see a reasonable case here.
Apple needs the money to pay off the Chinese government for market access. I am sure their next installment is coming up soon. 250 billion every other year?
You know Apple Privacy and Human rights stuff...sort of...umm yeah...privacy.
As time goes on my love of Apple and its products is getting tarnished. Tim Cook says one thing in some fluff media spot and then Apple does the opposite in the real world.
Don't get me wrong, I love capitalism, but do not try to cover it up with woke virtual signaling, and worse yet make it a marketing point, a big one (privacy).
You know Apple Privacy and Human rights stuff...sort of...umm yeah...privacy.
As time goes on my love of Apple and its products is getting tarnished. Tim Cook says one thing in some fluff media spot and then Apple does the opposite in the real world.
Don't get me wrong, I love capitalism, but do not try to cover it up with woke virtual signaling, and worse yet make it a marketing point, a big one (privacy).
Yes, physically opening up your computer and replacing RAM or storage drives is the same as navigating to your search settings and picking a name from a list.
You can't compare those two for this; they are completely different situations.
Lol Apple is in no way a Monopoly so…… just cause they make the most money don’t make them a monopoly folks.
well... given the fact that lobbyist exist.... regulators do something... take the money and deposit it into their accounts.
Oh, and they tell their spouses about the ongoing/upcoming regulations so they can position their portfolios accordingly.....
Only yandex is a good or even better in certain areas (image search) than google but it cant be set as search engine on safari unless you set you region to russia or ukraine, etc, so google it is.
"Default settings" can be lucrative for companies whether it be default search engine, default browser, default homepage, tabs, various apps, etc. Yes, it is easy to switch but many people don't bother.
The Carpenters wrote some catchy tunes like "Hurting Each Other" maybe there's a lesson in that ?
I'm still wondering how an Apple breakup would look "in accordance with the precedent of the breakup of Standard Oil"?! Hardware and Software have always needed to be very closely collaborated on, so it couldn't be carved up along those lines. I suppose Media (Music, TV, News) and Services (iCloud, Fitness, etc..) could be spin-off but to accomplish what exactly? I mean does the framework for splitting up an oil company apply to the chimera that is a tech company like Apple or Google?
I'm still wondering how an Apple breakup would look "in accordance with the precedent of the breakup of Standard Oil"?! Hardware and Software have always needed to be very closely collaborated on, so it couldn't be carved up along those lines. I suppose Media (Music, TV, News) and Services (iCloud, Fitness, etc..) could be spin-off but to accomplish what exactly? I mean does the framework for splitting up an oil company apply to the chimera that is a tech company like Apple or Google?
The situation here would be more about Google's "monopoly" on the search engine business and the alleged agreement between Google and Apple to help Google maintain that dominance, rather than any sort of Apple monopoly issue.
Probably for the better otherwise apple would be the one getting sued plus everyone else would say how much they hate it any way.
In this hypotetical, it deprives customers of the chance of using an alternative carpenter who may offer a better service.
Now, do we know for sure apple was ever interested in entering the search engine business? I don’t think so.
No. According to the article, there is AN ALLEGATION (by people trying to make a lot of money) that they do not have one because they are paid not to.
Did they enable the "avoid highways" option at some point in the past? When the sheet pops up to pick the route, if you pull up there are toggles for tolls and highways. If you tend to use the top result you may not see this section.
edit: just trying to be helpful, it isn't a very noticeable bit of UI. The fact it is "sticky" seems prone to forgetting to turn it off after using once.
Apple has an agreement with Google that it won't develop its own internet search engine so long as Google pays it to remain the default option in Safari, a new class action alleges.
Filed in a California court earlier this week against Apple, Google, and their respective CEOs, the lawsuit alleges the two companies have a non-compete agreement in the internet search business that violates US antitrust laws.
Specifically, the complaint charges Apple CEO Tim Cook and Google CEO Sundar Pichai of participating in "regular secret meetings" in which Google agrees to share its profits with Apple if it is given preferential treatment on devices like the iPhone and iPad.
The class action also alleges that Google pays Apple annual multi-billion-dollar payments based on an agreement that Apple won't launch its own competing search engine, and that the non-compete agreement includes plans to actively suppress smaller competitors and acquire actual and potential competitors.
The complaint claims that advertising rates are subsequently higher than rates would be in a competitive system. It therefore seeks an injunction prohibiting the non-compete agreement between Google and Apple, a cessation of the profit-sharing agreement and preferential treatment, and an end to the multi-billion dollar payments.
Lastly, the complaint calls for "the breakup of Google into separate and independent companies and the breakup of Apple into separate and independent companies in accordance with the precedent of the breakup of Standard Oil company into Exxon, Mobile, Conoco, Amoco, Sohio, Chevron, and others."
It's no secret Apple and Google have a considerable monetary agreement that ensures Google's position as the default search engine on Apple devices. Neither company has ever confirmed exactly how much Google pays to be the default search engine on Apple devices in the United States, the United Kingdom, and other countries, but it's rumored to be in the billions.
In 2020, The New York Times reported that Apple receives an estimated $8-12 billion per year in exchange for making Google the default search on its devices. According to one analyst, Google's payment to Apple in 2021 to maintain this status quo may have reached up to $15 billion.
This is believed to be the single biggest payment Google makes to anyone, and could account for up to a fifth of Apple's annual profits. But it has also drawn scrutiny in the past, in particular from the US Justice Department, which claims that the deal is representative of illegal tactics used to protect Google's monopoly and stifle competition.
The UK Competition and Markets Authority has also called the arrangement a "significant barrier to entry and expansion" for rivals in the search engine market, and in 2020 asked for enforcement authorities to be provided with a range of options to address the deal between Apple and Google to provide a more level playing field for other search engines.
Bringing the antitrust case to a San Francisco court this week, lawyer Joseph M Alioto said: "These powerful companies abused their size by unlawfully foreclosing and monopolizing major markets which in an otherwise free enterprise system would have created jobs, lowered prices, increased production, added new competitors, encouraged innovations, and increased the quality of services in the digital age."
Apple and Google would likely argue that while the payments are indeed for Google to remain the default search option, users can select other search engines in Safari including Microsoft's Bing, Verizon's Yahoo, and independent search engines DuckDuckGo and Ecosia.
Apple would also likely point out that it is already in the search engine business and maintains an active web crawler, called Applebot. The crawler chiefly operates in the background to improve Siri and Spotlight search results, although past reports have interpreted Applebot's increased activity as Apple "stepping up efforts" to develop its own search technology should its agreement with Google become incompatible with antitrust laws.
Article Link: Google Basically Pays Apple to Stay Out of the Search Engine Business, Class Action Lawsuit Alleges
I have to ask ... why is an agreement, legal, need to be a Class Action setup if nothing wrong was done??
So let me get this straight... people want Apple to spend millions creating a search engine business that probably wouldnt compete with google anyway (MS has already tried with Bing). Or just take 9 billion a year for 1 line of code that defaults to a googles search engine...
mmm... Thats a really difficult proposition that. lol!
Despite having a fudiciary duty not to waste share holders money , I dont think Apple is an NGO or some other charity. Its a business. A capitalist business, primarily there to make money.
The only way Apple would create a search product is if google didnt let it operate on iPhones or google was crap. Neither of those things are true at this point.
I think there would be a shareholder rebellion if the company said they left 9b on the table.. utter madness.
mmm... Thats a really difficult proposition that. lol!
Despite having a fudiciary duty not to waste share holders money , I dont think Apple is an NGO or some other charity. Its a business. A capitalist business, primarily there to make money.
The only way Apple would create a search product is if google didnt let it operate on iPhones or google was crap. Neither of those things are true at this point.
I think there would be a shareholder rebellion if the company said they left 9b on the table.. utter madness.
No. we pay as users, financially in the purchase price of an iphone, app costs, icloud and through a lack of innovation,
In this case there could multiple carpenters, but only one get known because he pays the local media channels not to allow the others to advertise