FWIW I've bought software before where the contract has both a license agreement and a limited patent license when the software is designed to throw me into violation of their patents. I've never heard of a company arguing they can sell the one and not the other while claiming both however.

That's not true. In all contract law there is a concept called "the form of the contract" which means contracts are interpreted inside of a context and that context is included in the contract unless explicitly excluded. For example if X signs a service contract with Y which lists the services by X and payments by Y but never says that X will perform the services or that Y will deliver those payments it is assumed from the form. On the other hand an insurance list is just a list.

Either side could call Stallman as a witness. I can't imagine that some percentage of the plethora of materials explaining what a derived work is and what is meant that has been written by open source advocates over the past 3 decades won't make its way into evidence.

I'm not assuming in the case of cellular we have good data on spends and profits.

well as overwhelming majority of google's money flow is in Europe

Google's revenues don't come majority from Europe. Europe is about 20%. That's smaller BTW than the 27% that Google had in China when they started fighting with the Chinese government. They halved their Chinese revenue but didn't have to impose censorship. And that required the Chinese government funding a major non-Google competitor in China. I think the Spanish government would have a harder time for a variety of reasons.

All of these have vested interest in google staying in Europe.

That's right. In terms of the monopolist position that may not be possible. Google may simply decide they would rather go offshore than agree to European governments breaking them up. This is a company with a track record of doing exactly that with China. And as you can see Spain is getting ready to cave. The EU governments are losing. "We will shift the news Spanish citizens consume away from news produced in Spain" was a fairly credible counter threat.

Now obviously if the governments are concerned enough they can win a war against Google. But given that Google has a monopoly in Europe because their citizenry likes Google, backlash wouldn't be shocking.

Companies win fights against governments all the time. Ask Latin America about American Fruit Co. if you want a really extreme example. The USA governments has had problems with OPEC (a cartel but close enough) for 4 decades.
___

As for climate denialism I'm not sure how that contradicts global culture. That seems to support it, showing people gathering not by geography but by political / idealogical affiliation.

Yes. And likely grow. But more importantly the old media that decides they want to transform may have to move their internet operations including financially out of Spain.

No like them actually caring and voting for the minority party in the next election.

You are confusing the American people with American business. American business benefits from goods sold abroad but doesn't like the price suppression domestically from foreign competition.

The American people's welfare has become only loosely correlated with American business. Sales abroad which are mainly services do very little for them because the labor is often offshored.

As far as Smoot-Hawley major disruption handled badly is a bad thing. Though frankly other policies were far more destructive than the drop in trade as the post WWII economy which was low trade demonstrated. Moreover at the time the USA was a manufacturing economy running large trade surpluses. That's not remotely the situation today nor what anyone is suggesting.

I put this together from several sources. But some good general articles

http://www.clevelandfed.org/re...
http://www.theatlantic.com/bus...
http://www.bls.gov/cex/2010/st...
http://visualeconomics.creditl...

You can Google and find a ton on this.

Absolutely. I was talking the cell phone market in terms of profit share. Rich people don't spend that much more on food than poor people. I'm not sure it is worth segmenting. Apparel spending is falling across all income brackets, but assuming that's transition then we can track it. Women spend most of the money on clothing and the rule of thumb for them was 5%. That holds up to about $120k and then mostly levels out. Men however are nowhere near as lucrative when it comes to clothes. So even here you want to segment a bit by sex. Some things like rent and tobacco correlate negatively with income.

Electronics though (Best Buy) oh heck yeah income matters. Spending on electronic devices doubles for every 50% increase in income. That doesn't level out until you get over $200k / year in income.

That's a tough law to enforce and likely to provoke a heck of a lot of backlash.

So they were punished for seeing the writing on the wall and these days everybody does it without any problem even though the situation is the same

The situation isn't the same. Netscape went bankrupt. Browsers became a free product. The market for browsers died.

on systems like iOS you cant even install a different browser, the most you can do is a skin of the built in browser.

Well first off there are two engines the one Safari uses and the one the rest use. Moreover products like Opera really do use a different engine. Apple has wanted a high security engine for iOS from a 3rd party: Trident but so far Microsoft has said no. Maxathon does use a different engine without objection from Apple because they handle the security off device. The only engine that's missing that you can blame Apple for is Gecko. I'd say it is more nuanced.

They were, we already know this. You could remove IE but the trident engine would remain for use by the operating system, just the same way it works with WebKit on iOS and the browser components in Android.

I agree. Microsoft however said in court that OEMs couldn't change the default browser because of this. I believe they were lying and agree with what you wrote above. But that's what they testified to.

No it was a key element of the EU antitrust case.

I get that. I'm saying I don't think the case attacked the right issue.

Dude it isn't moronic. The market segmentation has a lot to do with the profits on handset sales, the profits on cellular contracts, the profits from software, the profits on advertising. The top 11% of customers are worth more than the remaining 89% by a lot. Heck the top 3% may be worth more than the bottom 97%.

You can desegment the "transportation facilitation devices" and list shoes, bicycles, cars and airplanes in one big pile. But that doesn't change the fact a single airplane sale is worth many many sales of shoes.

That's easy, heck Lycos still exists. The question is how do they get their population to use it?

It is illegal in Spain to not collect the fee. That's how the Spanish law differs from the German law. On the other hand the possibility of Spanish internet news moving abroad is very high. The first wave of bankruptcy would be the secondary Spanish news sites which depend on Google to drive traffic. So they are going to be highly motivated to sell their content to a Mexican newspaper with a Spanish news section...