[bestbits] Re: [governance] need for regulation ....

[Guru गुरु]

Guru,
>
> You are arguing that the Google search algorithm is a public good and 
> must be regulated as  such.
>
> I am saying Google is just another - firm in a dominant position whose 
> secret sauce is a closely guarded trade secret. Unlike Coke's secret 
> formula, Google's changes often; but it is still a trade secret if 
> that's the way the business operates.
>
Lee

No comparison between coke's formula and google's search algorithm
Code is law and architecture is policy...
Please read 
http://www.stanford.edu/class/msande91si/www-spr04/readings/week3/Lessig-pcforum.pdf 
or http://harvardmagazine.com/2000/01/code-is-law-html

Guru
> So yes my view is that in spite of all appearances of present 
> invincibility, odds are Google is just another firm with dominant 
> products in markets, at a particular point in time.
>
> Which usual government regulatory proceedings can handle without 
> resorting to a global regulatory takings process whose likelihood of 
> success is somewhere around highly unlikely; is all I am saying. It 
> would be a good topic for IGF.
>
> The concept of 'search neutrality' never got much traction, but it is 
> definitely legitimate for the Indian, and European, and US regulators 
> to consider the market impact of Google search results and address 
> them if there is evidence of abuse of a dominant position.
>
> Which, cough cough, well let's wait til the dust/smoke settles, but 
> certainly smells like Google has grown up to the point it may safely 
> be forecast that they will be operating under various competition 
> policy regulatory reviews for years to come.
>
> Congrats? ; )
>
> Lee
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140311/6d0294d8/attachment.htm>