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

Lee W McKnight lmcknigh at syr.edu
Mon Mar 10 15:05:33 EDT 2014 

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.

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


________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org <governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org> on behalf of Guru गुरु <Guru at ITforChange.net>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 2:36 PM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Re: [governance] need for regulation ....

On 03/10/2014 10:26 PM, Lee W McKnight wrote:

I agree with Adam and Carlos there is a confounding of the issue in terms of Guru asking for the proprietary algorithm to be public. Google tweaks that almost daily it is my understanding, so even if yesterday's agorithm was public, it wouldn't do much good - today.

Lee
So is there any technological impossibility in sharing this daily/ as and when a change is done? Don't see a point here.

 It would make it much harder for Google to do business,

I know, Google is finding it so hard to do business today, we don't want to make it any harder, do we  ;-) ....   certainly not with any regulation that would address critical issues I mentioned in my initial mail on this thread!


 and would lead to the algorithm-gaming behavior of other firms that Adam predicts.

On the other hand, regulatory review of possible bias/self-dealing in search results and their impact on competition in a market is fair game, even if the US FTC said 'play on' in its own review.

In that sense, the India competition policy review of Google is a relatively routine analysis of a firm in dominant positions in multiple markets.


not really Lee .... This can be tectonic .... The policy review should need the regulator to review the search algorithm, whose secret nature is a big part of Google's power. See, this investigation is not about some simple manipulation of markets by some explicit/physical methods as may usually be the case. We are discussing the search algorithm which is ordering the world's knowledge / information for each of us.  "Code is law",  Lessig said; this review process by CCI  logically should wrench the control of the search algorithm from a private entity enforcing 'law' for its own profit maximisation (and God/Snowden know for what else), to a public good process/approach.

Technically, CCI should require Google to share its algorithm with it or a relevant/competent authority that can assure us that Google is not illegally manipulating the page views  ...and also require Google to prior clear any change in algorithm with such an authority ... while I admit that this is  unlikely to happen, however  I see my position as logical...

Guru


For example, re the ongoing EU inquiries on Google's practices, and possible remedies, see:
http://www.euractiv.com/innovation-enterprise/google-remains-eu-scrutiny-news-533755

Lee
________________________________________
From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net<mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net> <bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net><mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net> on behalf of Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp><mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2014 11:49 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>; Guru गुरु
Cc: Best Bits
Subject: [bestbits] Re: [governance] need for regulation ....

Hi Guru,

On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:26 PM, Guru गुरु wrote:



Dear all,

Not clear, how in Multistakeholderism, where the private sector has an equal footing in public policy making, we will get Google to agree that its search algorithm, as the key factor organising the worlds information/knowledge for all of us, needs to be public knowledge, not a commercial secret.



Are you sure about this?  If the algorithm's public then it will be gamed.  Logical extension of this is searches will no return accurate results, no longer be trusted, and a very useful resource will be pretty much be made useless.  Is this your intention?

Best,

Adam




The need for it to be public knowledge stems from privacy/surveillance concerns, because such fundamental knowledge ought to be available as 'cultural commons' that others can take/re-use/revise, fostering competition etc.

regards,
Guru

Google faces Rs 30,500-cr fine in India
New Delhi, PTI: March 9, 2014

 Google can face a penalty of up to about $5 billion if it is found to have violated competition norms of the country.  Google, which is facing anti-trust investigation in India by fair trade watchdog Competition Commission of India (CCI), can face a penalty of up to about $5 billion (Rs 30,500 crore) if it is found to have violated competition norms of the country.

Google said it is “extending full cooperation” to the CCI in its investigation. The conclusion of a two-year review by the US antitrust watchdog has concluded that the company's services were good for competition, it added. The case has been before the CCI for over two years now, and it relates to allegations that Google is abusing its dominant position. Under competition regulations, an entity found violating the norms could be slapped with penalty of up to 10 per cent of its three-year annual average turnover. In the case of Google, its annual revenues in the last three years amounts to a staggering $49.3 billion (Rs 3.01 lakh crore), and the maximum penalty can be up to nearly $5 billion.

When asked about the ongoing probe and the potential penalty, a Google spokesperson said: “We are extending full co-operation to the Competition Commission of India in their investigation.”  The emailed statement added: “We're pleased that the conclusion of the Federal Trade Commission's two-year review was that Google's services are good for users and good for competition.”

A complaint filed with the CCI cannot be withdrawn. The complaint against Google, also one of the world's most valued company, was first filed by advocacy group CUTS International way back in late 2011. Later. Matrimonial website matrimony.com Private Ltd also filed a complaint. Last year, CCI chairman Ashok Chawla had said the complaint was that the Google search engine favours platforms it wants to support.

“That is, when you click on Google under a certain category, you will get the platforms where there is a tendency to put them in a certain order which may not be the fair and non-discriminatory. So, what is the software and what is the algorithmic search, (that is) what the investigation team is looking at,” Chawla had said.

source - http://www.deccanherald.com/content/390977/google-faces-rs-30500-cr.html
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
To be removed from the list, visit:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
    http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140310/c44f52f0/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t

More information about the Governance mailing list