• @northendtrooper@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    509 months ago

    When will punishment stop being attached to a hard number and be a percentage of the company’s worth. Shits maddening.

    • @Khanzarate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      299 months ago

      While I’d love a percentage based fee, this is a damages suit, so it should be actual damages these people are owed, as determined by the court. A percentage just doesn’t make sense here unless punitive damages were also on the table.

      In principle I agree, though, breaking the law should not be an affordable “cost of doing business”.

    • FenrirIII
      link
      fedilink
      English
      89 months ago

      These companies shift gains and losses around so much that they would evade any punishment

      • paraphrand
        link
        fedilink
        English
        89 months ago

        “As you can see your honor, we actually lost 400 million last year. Negative profit. It looks like you actually owe us money when you calculate the proposed fine…”

      • @muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        59 months ago

        Surly u can make it the value of a percentage of shaires. The primary purpose of any company is the keep the shairholders happy either pay ur fines or fail ur primary purpose.

    • @mods_are_assholes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      179 months ago

      Oh it’s much worse than that, google’s been caught fudging the numbers several times and that has led to this.

      Look I hate corporations more than most of you but if Google has a stipulation in their ad contract that x% are real human eyes and then count 1px embedded ads as ‘human eyes’, then Google is in violation of their ad contract. On TOP of that they lied about it as well.

  • @Aopen@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    89 months ago

    The lawsuit comes at a time when Google’s core advertising business is facing an existential threat from the shift to generative AI chat, Luria added.

    Is this BS or I dont understand something? In what way generative AI is currently an existential threat to online advertising?

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    English
    69 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Alphabet’s Google was hit with a €2.1bn ($2.3bn) lawsuit by 32 media groups including Axel Springer and Schibsted on Wednesday, alleging that they had suffered losses due to the company’s practices in digital advertising.

    The move by the groups – which include publishers in Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Hungary, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain and Sweden – comes as antitrust regulators also crack down on Google’s ad-tech business.

    “The media companies involved have incurred losses due to a less competitive market, which is a direct result of Google’s misconduct,” a statement issued by their lawyers, Geradin Partners and Stek, said.

    “Without Google’s abuse of its dominant position, the media companies would have received significantly higher revenues from advertising and paid lower fees for ad tech services.

    “If there is follow through to the regulatory scrutiny, Google may need to curtail its practices and provide more consistent, predicable pricing to its advertising customers,” DA Davidson & Co analyst Gil Luria said.

    The lawsuit comes at a time when Google’s core advertising business is facing an existential threat from the shift to generative AI chat, Luria added.


    The original article contains 404 words, the summary contains 190 words. Saved 53%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!