I am surprised by that appeal statistic. In three years I would give search a 99.9% chance of being decimated by AI. This case says it is illegal to pay for exclusivity. It says NOTHING about TAC payments or revenue sharing.
It's a form of insurance that they keep their monopoly... I mean search LOL!! Everyone knows that this is illegal competition, why it took the government 14 years to wake up is beyond me. There is a simple remedy, ask the user what search he wants as his default search engine and then Apple charges that engine each time a user searches for something.
I am surprised by that appeal statistic. In three years I would give search a 99.9% chance of being decimated by AI.
This case says it is illegal to pay for exclusivity. It says NOTHING about TAC payments or revenue sharing.
Once again, the lawyers win with their massive fees.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Great insights as always! 👏
The fact we need to talk in code here, and their activist manipulation of search, means something needs to change for evil Gaggle.
It's a form of insurance that they keep their monopoly... I mean search LOL!! Everyone knows that this is illegal competition, why it took the government 14 years to wake up is beyond me. There is a simple remedy, ask the user what search he wants as his default search engine and then Apple charges that engine each time a user searches for something.
Blue links is dead tech