Google Blocks YouTube Access from Amazon's Streaming Devices

I would recommend you judge everyone, but particularly corporations, by the effect they have and not what some subset of their mouthpieces claim they are doing.

We can file that under "Meaningless Feel-Good Corporate Propaganda", right below "Don't be evil".

Maybe it helps them sleep better at night but don't fall for the corporate PR BS that they're changing the world for the better.

I don't blame Google, nor do I blame the hardware vendor - I don't expect my devices to receive software updates forever, and I don't expect Google to keep the same API forever either.

Amazon fired the first shots tho. This is their fault and they should put Google products back up on their store.

https://youtu.be/9pmPa_KxsAM?t=10402

My guess is this goes all way to the top, to Larry:

> It started when a guy from Mozilla asked a question about the future of the Web and mobile platforms. Page dove right in. “I’ve personally been quite sad at the industry’s behavior around all these things," he said. "If you take something as simple as IM, we’ve had an open offer to interoperate forever. Just this week Microsoft took advantage of that by interoperating with us. You can’t have people milking off of just one company.”

> He was referring to Microsoft’s announcement that it would incorporate Google Talk into Outlook.com, even though it doesn’t allow Google to incorporate Outlook functions into Gmail. But as AllThingsD’s Mike Isaac noted, he left out the part where Google recently sent Microsoft a cease-and-desist letter demanding that it remove the YouTube app from its Windows Phones.

> Page wasn’t finished. “You can’t focus on negativity and zero-sum games,” he said. “I don’t know how to deal with all of those things, and I’m sad that the Web isn’t advancing as fast as it should be. We struggle with people like Microsoft.” A question about Oracle and Java got him going again. “We’ve had a difficult relationship with Oracle, including having to appear in court,” Page said. “Money is obviously more important to them than any collaboration.”

> It turns out this is also the media’s fault. “Every story I read about Google is us vs. some other company, or some stupid thing. I just don’t find that very interesting. We should be building great things that don’t exist. Being negative isn’t how we make progress.”

> To recap, Page criticized Microsoft for treating Google as a rival, blasted Oracle for caring too much about money, and then whined about everyone being so negative. Heck, if it weren’t for those other companies standing in the way, Google would have probably already solved world hunger. Well, except for all the laws and bureaucrats and journalists who are also standing in the way.

https://archive.fo/OuL1T

I love the work that people at Amazon.com are doing. However, as we push upwards of 60% of US households on Amazon prime, I think we have reasons to be worried.

like acchow said:

> Amazon fired the first shots tho. This is their fault and they should put Google products back up on their store.

Google nor Amazon control the pipes and here in the US for home broadband it's a monopoly or a duopoly. With Net Neutrality gone my monopolistic broadband provider can start blocking sites, charging me to access different sites and etc. They can turn the Internet into the horrendous model and experience that is Cable TV.

No way is Google's actions here have anything to do with Net Neutrality. Rather in this instance a consumer can go just go ahead and buy another streaming device if they choose to do so. That's because there's competition and lots of it in this space vs. fast uncapped broadband.

No, Amazon leveraging it's exclusive content and video service to sell FireTV, or Google leveraging YouTube to sell Chromecast, is not a violation of Net Neutrality, or within the statutory mandate of the FCC even more generally.

Either might be a violation of anti-trust law within the purview of the FTC, of course.

Now, this would probably not be in the scope of NN and the FCC, but more of anti-trust laws.

Network neutrality means neutral behavior of the transmission networks.

It does not mean "Everything consumers think of when they hear the words 'The Net'" neutrality.

I think both Google and Amazon are acting like jerks here, but I can't think of federal-level rules I'd change or put into place that wouldn't make things worse.

Similarly, "Road Neutrality" only applies to actual roads. It doesn't mean the local McDonald's has to let anybody could use their drive-thru for any reason, or that you're allowed to park in your neighbor's driveway, or that you can freely wander around a NASCAR track.