Tiger sniffing original group works
Author 丨 angel does not invest in
10 years ago, Google (China) withdrew from China; 10 years later, Google intends to withdraw from Europe.
The reason why Google has withdrawn from the EU is not the same as withdrawing from China. Today's EU is no longer a land of the Internet. Suining said that with the rise of global isolated thoughts, “the network is open”, this matter is becoming more and more illusory, and governments have taken the practice of multinational Internet companies. The Internet that connects the world has been killed by the world.
Compared with the two, China has become the leader in the construction of the network system.
Want to make money in the EU? No door
Google’s threat this time, “Brexit”, the direct cause is “link tax”.
This is not the first time Google has been awkward with the EU. As early as 2017, because the “monopoly advantage of abuse of search”, the EU has issued a ticket of up to 2.4 billion euros to Google, the highest record of anti-monopoly fines at that time; but this number was quickly surpassed —— In July of this year, the EU issued a 4.3 million euro price ticket to Google on the grounds that “Android is suspected of monopolizing”.
However, all this is not over yet. Time came to September, the European Parliament passed the controversial “Digital Single Market Copyright Directive”, which included the possibility of a future “real estate” link tax.
What is the link tax?
In the Internet world, citing the original content of other authors, if you want to copy and paste the full text reprint, you need to obtain the original author's consent, that is, "authorization", this is common knowledge (if you are a WeChat public account operation editor , probably familiar with this process). More often, everyone will also play a dozen non-hazardous edge balls, send a title, brief content, paste hyperlinks, etc. In general, it is not necessary to "authorize".
The link tax implies that in the future, whether it is a title, an overview or a link, you need to be authorized —— this is almost the life of companies like Google and Facebook. Coupled with the entanglement of the EU for many years, issued a "Brother" threat, it is reasonable.
However, the EU can not only add to Google or Facebook. The General Data Protection Regulation, which was passed in May this year, is also the notorious “GDPR”, which has made China's Ali, Tencent, headlines and other big companies also guilty for a long time.
Simply put, privacy is a basket, and you can install it all. The network service providers who could have relied on the “safe haven principle” to operate safely now have a strong conflict with the privacy of individual users under the framework of GDPR, and it is inevitable that they will tremble.
For the specific restrictions of GDPR, Internet practitioners who have tried or tried to expand their business in the EU have long been familiar with it, and those who are temporarily living in the country may not yet appreciate its power. Briefly describe the GDPR rules with a few words:
Delicate to the privacy of the human head. A and B take a photo, if the photo is to be used on the network, both A and B are required to formally authorize the consent, and cannot be authorized by default in the user agreement. If there are 100 people in the group, 100 people need to be authorized separately, no exceptions;
Information on the overseas presence of EU residents is also regulated. For example, German citizens take selfies on the streets of Beijing. Chinese Internet companies cannot use the photos as “"Beijing”"China” related materials, otherwise they may face disputes;
The platform cannot proxy authorization. For example, if the user has authorized platform A, platform A cannot directly authorize platform B, but must be specifically agreed by the user. And if the user withdraws the authorization, Platform A not only needs to stop the use of the material itself, but also bears the responsibility of notifying Platform B in time and letting Platform B stop using it;
Full authorization (all content generated by the user on the platform) is not allowed. The user agreement must specify what content is authorized, and the unspecified content is equal to no authorization ……
I believe that every Internet company manager who has been responsible for specific products understands how complicated the above restrictions are. After the passage of GDPR, the Internet company mourned, and the business that violated the regulations had to be suspended; there were possible products for transformation, rapid transformation, and the business logic of obtaining authorization was put on the line. It is worth mentioning that, because some of the authorization projects can not be written only in the user agreement (ineffective according to the GDPR regulations), other authorization methods, such as pop-up confirmation, need to be added.
During the renovation, if you need to authorize all kinds of content, you must find a lawyer to ask for authorization. Because of the Google’s high-priced ticket, the Internet companies are trembled and feared to become a tool for the EU to kill chickens and monkeys. Especially for multinational companies that have just made their business to Europe, if they have not made any money, they will get a ticket, which will hurt them.
Under the control of GDPR, it is not easy to be a good company that is law-abiding. Whether it is product modification or application for authorization, it will take time and white money. The cash flow of most Internet companies is stretched, and I am afraid that it will not be enough after this toss. Even for the Internet giants of the rich countries, such laws lead to high costs, can the EU region's earnings still entice them?
Chinese students who have gone to school in Europe have been sinned because of the impact of GDPR. When they log in to Chinese websites and applications, they will pop up the GDPR prompt. International students who can't hear cloud music are just one of the epitome.
A problem lies in the face of Internet company operators: is it to withstand the pressure to spread the Internet freedom, share the gospel, or recognize the nature of their entrepreneurs, profit-first, slow down the pace of entering the EU?
Build your own wall
Compared with China and the United States, the EU, which is relatively backward in the Internet field, has always been known as “the police of the science and technology circle”. They will be ignorant of multinational corporations and protect the local Internet ecology through GDPR, link tax and other bills.
However, China and the United States, which have advantages in the Internet field, do the same.
After Apple stored Chinese user data in the cloud in Guizhou, some users were quite dissatisfied with Apple's weak protection of user data, and believed that the relevant departments "too much control". However, in March of this year, Trump signed the “CLOUD Act”, which was dubbed the “Internet Long Arm Act” (the Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act, CLOUD Act). The United States has entered the era of "governing wider" in accordance with the law. In short, Trump can investigate Microsoft's Irish server.
According to the CLOUD Act, the data on the cloud in Guizhou should be legally invoked by the US government. In other words, the data of Chinese Apple users can not only be kept secret from the Chinese government, but also subject to investigations by the US government. In addition to Apple's cloud in Guizhou, Amazon's AWS China is also facing this dilemma.
If GDPR seems to be “always treated” for all Internet companies, there is no national or regional color, so the CLOUD bill restricts the hearts of multinational companies. Monitoring the business of domestic Internet companies in other countries paves the way for further taxation and fines. If such a law is introduced, the history of multinational Internet companies “large tax evaders” will never go back.
You can also think of it as part of Trump<;Isolationism" "anti-globalization". As early as the CLOUD Act, Trump had promoted the abolition of the Democratic Party's political legacy in the end of 2017. Some have read from the media that the abolition of legislation in the Internet is aimed at foreign countries, and made amazing predictions such as "China's broken network" and other mdash;— similar exaggeration predictions are of course absurd, but the abolition of legislation in the network It also weakens the competitiveness of multinational companies such as the Chinese Internet giant.
Network neutrality clearly discusses the relationship between telecom operators and network information. What does it do with multinational companies?
We may wish to recall the domestic carrier services such as Tencent King. Strictly speaking, such fee-based services are a violation of the principle of network neutrality: users who purchase and use the Tencent King card will tend to use Tencent's services more. The scenario expands to multinational business: If US carriers launch discount packages related to local web-based businesses, US users will prefer US services and content rather than transnational.
In fact, already. Wal-Mart and Mobile operator T-Mobile launched the Walmart Family Mobile package for $49.99 per month, unlimited traffic (video-limited image quality), plus $24.88 for a home user —— for comparison, T-Mobile is usually The unlimited flow package is available for up to $120 per month for 2 people. It should be noted that this service can only be purchased through the Walmart channel.
T-Mobile's expensive package is not "all fools", this package comes with Netflix members, the meaning of Netflix is self-evident. T-Mobile and Netflix are not the best. AT&T's $80 flow-free card can watch videos with 1080P traffic, share 15GB of hotspots, and can stream from 7 media such as HBO, Pandora and Amazon Music. Choose one of the services.
Another operator, Sprint's service, can offer Amazon Prime members, Lookout members, hulu members, Tidal members, and Uber vouchers. This is not only a matter of local content services, but also local life services (both Softbank investments, a family behind Uber and Sprint). In contrast, Verizon's service is to send the network disk and Apple Music, although not luxurious enough, but we are happy to see Apple finally appeared.
As for China, it is more prophetic than the EU and the US. In November 2016, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress issued the “Network Security Law of the People's Republic of China”, which was implemented in June 2017. The details are not detailed, for example: Steam must have a Chinese branch to have a legal basis.
As for the greater prophetic vision, it is Great Wall.
Network is good, technology is not guilty?
In the game between institutions and technology, the government will always slow down Internet companies for half a shoot. The law can't keep up with technological advances, and the market is not so “regular”; this kind of irregular environment is usually considered to need improvement, but in some cases it is also good for new things “barbaric growth”.
When Internet companies add "transnational" properties, barbaric growth is inevitable. Once in the game with the government or users occupy the information high ground, the Internet company's body is quickly flexible.
In fact, even today, even with a series of restrictions such as GDPR, CLOUD, and cybersecurity laws, because different regulatory environments in different countries have created sufficient room for vacancies, how many multinational giants have played with each country, even the strongest in the United States. Large state machines are difficult to detect.
However, after eating a lot of boring losses, local governments gradually recognized the essence of Internet companies: the production materials of Internet companies are their consumers, that is, users of various countries. On the surface, it is a green economy, and in fact consumes a limited amount of “resources” & —— user attention and time. If every American is watching the vibrato, the short-lived video application in the United States is difficult to grow. This is a very simple truth, but the way the Internet operates makes this layer of logic relatively hidden.
All restrictions on multinational Internet companies, on the surface of privacy and security, reveal the government’s vigilance and rejection of the Internet’s surge, even if it is late and slow. The EU is the most responsive, almost wanting to reject all multinational Internet companies through antitrust and GDPR. The background is in the global Internet landscape, the EU's own Internet business is the weakest and least competitive.
To make matters worse, this kind of rejection at the national level has its roots, that is, public opinion.
EU residents have always valued privacy, so Google has not been sinned. In Brexit, a pregnant woman shared her miscarriage with her friends and relatives through Facebook. Since then, Facebook has been promoting infant products to them (Facebook is not a big data), and this has caused widespread discussion. Facebook feels pressure.
The American people are not too much to let. Since political advertising on Facebook has been suspected of being launched by foreign (Russian) institutions, US left-wing media such as The New York Times and The Washington Post have never stopped suspicion and investigation of Facebook.
In the past 20 years, the open, shared Internet has brought countless conveniences to consumers. Nowadays, I don't know if Internet companies have such a little bit “over the border”, or users are getting harder to wait on. A large number of consumers are beginning to think about the advantages and disadvantages of the Internet: Selling privacy for convenience, is it good or bad? Is the Internet natural and justice? Is technology really innocent?
This year, Alipay bills & ldquo; default check & rdquo; a matter of brushing the user's screen, Ali fell into a public opinion vortex that does not respect privacy. In the sympathy, regret, gloating, and even the downfall, has every Internet person ever thought that privacy awareness has begun to awaken among Chinese people? Enterprises that have also suffered a serious public relations crisis have “small and smashed”, “cheat”, “set up” & quot; spam users & rdquo; microblogging … …
In the new E-Commerce Law passed in September, the requirement to call the user's privacy has also risen to an unprecedented height. The comparison between the old and new "Electric Business Law", on the "forgotten rights", personalization, network intellectual property rights, electronic contract formation, the determination of the party's ability to act, and many other details, the relevant departments "do not know, do not know how to understand" They are clearly reflected. Looking at GDPR and CLOUD, which involve a lot of products and technical details, governments are obviously experiencing the same awakening process — but a few years ago, the relevant knowledge was originally monopolized by Internet companies.
Can local Internet companies still have a long time to rely on technical barriers? Looking at the world, how long is it?
The world is hot and cold
The Internet is just a projection of the real world. Multinational network enterprises will be globalized and will also dedicate themselves to counter globalization. Globalization is further, the Internet is further; globalization is taking a step back, and the Internet has to retreat ten steps.
Multinational network enterprises can consume the time and energy of other netizens at low cost and earn money from other netizens. This is equivalent to robbing local resources in the colonies and selling them to local people. During the colonial era, he was wary of his country’s looting. The era of globalization was wary of dumping of other countries. As multinational Internet companies exposed the dual attributes of clearing and dumping, the era of isolation also followed.
The vigilance and punishment of multinational network enterprises is rooted in the isolated trend of thought and even nationalism. After the British left the European Union due to populism, everything is going out of control.
Trump’s coming to power seems to have accelerated this process. As the leader of the world's number one power, Trump's various "returning friends circle" behavior has been eccentric. There are many basic principles behind this unusual act of the great commander: America First.
When the United States takes the hair to fight for it, the common interests of mankind are stripped from the mainstream values (previously at least hanged on the mouth), other regimes are inevitable "from good as good".
A neighboring country with water in Japan, Abe for the third time, elected from the Democratic Party president, will continue to be in power until September 2021, will end the long second "Abe era". As for his position, it seems that it is not necessary to say more. The same important person who will end in 2021 and end the same long period is Merkel who has also experienced a long period of ruling and was dubbed by the neighboring country as the Queen of the Fourth Empire.
But the curtain call is not the focus, and long is the key. The Russian emperor and the Turkish Sultan are typical representatives of the political powers of the world, and more and more political powerhouses are coming to power. Modi, who also started from the populist, continues to follow the Indian populist road, and the Italian right wing also came to power in the populist. Not long ago, on November 1st, the big black horse Borsonaro, who had a very strong right-wing color, was elected president of Brazil. In the quotation of the person who claimed to be "Messiah", "the black slave should be enslaved." Speeches such as "rds." are just plain and usual.
From the very beginning, the Internet has entrusted the spirit of openness and freedom. It is one of the spiritual crystals of the reconstruction of the global order after the war. It is also an important achievement of peace and development that countless ordinary people yearn for. When countries have erected high walls, the online world born in the free order will suffer severe challenges that have never been seen before.
Optimistic, we can claim that: Which country maintains the correct values, can always adhere to the future with a free attitude, which country represents the common expectations of mankind and become the beneficiary of the new world structure. And when all major countries turn to conservative and closed, not only the whole world will not get better, but the Internet certainly cannot be immune to it.
The only lesson that history has brought us is that we cannot learn any lesson from history.
For the Internet, people are not worth it.