谷歌无垄断

The Federal Trade Commission, the top US consumer protection authority, ended its investigation of Google’s search business this week, without sanctions. The FTC has made the right call. Regulators in Europe should follow suit.

美国最主要的消费者保护机构联邦贸易委员会(FTC)本周结束了对谷歌(Google)搜索业务的调查，没有开出任何罚单。FTC的决定是正确的，欧洲的监管机构应当效仿。

Google has a durable advantage over its competitors in search, which it is leveraging to expand into new businesses – most notably shopping. This fits a pattern set by some forms of anti-competitive behaviour. But the reason for Google’s advantage, and how it is leveraging it, matters. The search engine with the most users has the most data about users, data that can improve search results, so attracting still more users. The traffic in turn leads to profits, and therefore investment, allowing further improvements. The key feature of this cycle is not coercion but a better product.

较竞争对手而言，谷歌在搜索领域具有长期的优势，它正在利用这种优势开拓新业务——尤其是购物。这具备某些“反竞争行为的特点。但重要的是谷歌握有优势的原因以及它利用优势的方式。该搜索引擎拥有最多的用户、以及最多的用户数据，这些数据能够改善搜索结果，从而吸引更多的用户。流量进而又带来利润和投资，令谷歌进一步改进技术。这一循环的关键特征不是强制用户使用，而是向用户提供更优秀的产品。

When Google offers so-called “vertical searches alongside its basic results – for example, a comparison shopping tool – is it pressing this advantage unfairly? No. Google has not increased the costs of using competitive products. It still remains dead easy to switch.

谷歌在提供基本搜索功能之外提供所谓的“垂直搜索（如比较购物工具），是否不公平地利用了这个优势？非也。谷歌并没有增加使用竞争对手产品的成本。切换到竞争对手产品仍然容易得很。

The FTC could, however, look at an area where builders of hardware-software systems can create switching costs: content portability.

不过，FTC可以关注一下的，是硬件-软件系统开发商可能会制造出切换成本的一个领域：内容可迁移性。

Music, films, games, photos and so on are now bought, made, consumed and stored on digital platforms. If a consumer decides that a new device or piece of software is better or cheaper than the incumbent, but does not buy it because content is tricky to prise loose from the current platform, there is a whiff of coercion in the air. Switching costs vary widely between content types and platforms (Apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Barnes and Noble), and depend on whether the consumer is moving content away or bringing it aboard. Third parties are, happily, building tools to facilitate movement. But the area remains ripe for abuse.

如今，我们在数字平台上购买、制作、消费和存储音乐、电影、游戏、图片等。如果消费者认定某款新设备或软件比手头所使用的更优秀或便宜，却因内容难以从现有平台上迁移出去而不去购买该设备或软件，那么现有平台便有了一丝强迫用户使用的嫌疑。不同内容类型和平台（如苹果(Apple)、谷歌、亚马逊(Amazon)、微软(Microsoft)、Barnes and Noble)之间的切换成本大不相同，另外还取决于消费者是要将内容迁移出平台，还是将内容携带出国。第三方很乐于开发促进可迁移性的工具。不过，该领域仍将受到滥用行为的困扰。