Google accuses Indian antitrust watchdog of plagiarizing EU ruling

theregister.com

18 points·gostsamo··10 comments

Doesnt the fact that the Indian antitrust watchdog was able to copy-paste stuff from the EU ruling that Google is unable to present a compelling defense against only serve to strengthen the watchdog's claims?

If an antitrust related issue is detected in one region of the world, there is no reason for other parts of the world to re-use not the already detected issue.

And be real: in "big tech", antitrust related issues are bazillions. Vanguard and blackrock have to fixed that in the big tech companies they own/steer.

I totally agree. However, copy/paste on such a high level must not happen. If you are making serious claims, you should demonstrate that they are true and not that something similar is true somewhere else. Otherwise, you can say that if A murdered B in 1995, then A murdered C and D because they were murdered in 1995 as well.

If the investigation and ruling from EU can be verified, if India has the same kind of anti-trust laws and the will to do it, why India would not go ahead???

It is true for all the other parts of the world with the same kind of anti-trust laws.

They don't have the exact same laws tho.

The only requirement is to have laws which are similar enough.

not when it comes to the law.

That's not required. To take a software analogy, you might have not exactly the same requirements in your project, but copy-paste 50 different parts from someone else's project to build yours with it. That alone doesn't make your project a failure.

"We did the same thing wrong over here as we did over there but it's cheating if you charge us for the same things! You have to phrase it differently, that's cheating!"

~ Google

In the legal world, plagiarism is known as "precedent".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com