I don't think I've ever read a company whinging so much about having to obey the law. Comes across like a petulant child.

A petulant child does not explain the negative consequences of what he is being asked to do using metrics and specific stakeholder feedback.

It does not help consumers to have outside parties run roughshod over businesses. Regulations are necessary, but to be effective, they must be measured, in both senses of the word. To be implemented carefully, they must be subject to criticism, even by the party being regulated.

Do you have any specific concerns with the points raised by Google here?

theZuck can do it just as well. Bezos was/is pretty good about it. After Amazon, he's still doing things like suing the gov't for not awarding his company contracts for missions he cannot achieve yet.

Apple has their share as does Microshaft. Once you climb to the top of the ladder, you get awarded to behave this way. At least that's the way it is perceived.

I don’t think no they are whining about obeying the law. In fact they are saying that with this reduced data that they are showing on the front search page, comparison sites are wining and direct to consumer airlines sites are losing. This would be fine for bigger airlines as they can still buy ads at the top of the page but not for the smaller airlines as they sometimes benefitted from the direct links that Google provided to those niche airline sites . In the end , the winner is going to be the one with the bigger pockets and not necessarily the best flights .

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-apple-ceo-cook-c...

Your unspoken premise is that the law in question is reasonable.

Clearly you haven’t read Apple’s responses. They were even worse