Antitrust Drumbeat Grows Louder Against Google
from the the-downside-to-success dept
Regardless of whether the DOJ decides to intervene in Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick, as Microsoft would like to see, it’s clear that the company continues to come under heavy antitrust scrutiny, if not from the government then from competitors and the media. The Washington Post’s Steven Pearlstein argues that the government should block the deal because the company is getting too powerful. However, he doesn’t really explain why he thinks that the company is now too powerful and needs to be restrained. Instead, he ends his column by stating (as if it were an accepted fact) that the DOJ’s case against Microsoft is what gave rise to Google, and that if the government did the same to Google now, the next Google might be allowed to rise up. Except, it’s not at all clear what the case against Microsoft had to do with the rise of Google. Up until recently, Google wasn’t even competing against Microsoft’s core business. If, say, Linux had exploded over the last few years that same way Google has, then you might be able to point to actions taken against Microsoft for an explanation. Unless Google’s opponents can demonstrate that the company is actually abusing its position to the detriment of the broader market and consumers, all of these antitrust complaints will be pretty flimsy.
Comments on “Antitrust Drumbeat Grows Louder Against Google”
Linux rules..
I just love to say that.
Microsoft will have its place in the network-centric world but Linux will also have a strong presence.
I have said it before, Linux and the GUIs that run on top of Linux are good but not the Kum-ba-ya baby blanket coverage that Microsoft gives.
Linux makes you think and gives you so much power and access. Microsoft discourages you from thinking and hides access and power.
Microsoft is too few choices;
Linux is too many choices.
Given the choice, I choose Linux, ’cause it rocks.
...
It’s not Google’s fault that the competition is retarded… Just my opinion though.
What a sham!
To even think of looking at Google from a antitrust standpoint you would have to argue the precedent that Microsoft has already set.
You can read through the findings of the anti-trust case here
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
It is very clear that no matter what a company does nowadays it is not a violation when compared to what Microsoft has done and continues to do with impunity.
It is a sad commentary on our own system’s inability to police itself and now we have a bunch of disguised Microsoft flunkies crying antitrust about Google.
Its a sick and sad world sometimes 🙂
The difference between google and MS, is google’s position is one of technical superiority; not marketing propaganda, restrictive licensing or anti-competitive practices .
They have a good product(s) that people want to use.
They allow mash ups of their content with other sites
They almost had a proper API set
MS may not be down and out, but I will say this wreaks of desperation. Trying to get the government to do what you could not. It just makes them look sad
You want to beat google? come up with a better search / advertising / video sharing / etc etc site. Because unlike MS, switching is just a mouse click away.
I’d rather have google and microsoft be monopolies than telcoms
maybe they should do something about them first.
leave google alone
all I can say is that I never ran across a google web page that I could not render in a non-microsoft browser.
wish I could say the same about microsoft – they still to this day continue their monopolist anti-trust behavior and yet the doj just goes on as usual.
google isn’t even competing with microsoft – so I don’t understand where microsoft is coming from. maybe they are just getting too rich and billy and stevie are jealous.
at least I have a choice of what operating system to use and all of google’s stuff still works no matter what os I chose. microsoft should just shut up and quite whining until they can say that – then we might listen to them.
Stupid people
People always complain that companies are “too” big, but there is no definition of what too big is. Google has not been doing any of the same thing MS was doing to squeeze out it’s competitors, and it does still have competitors. MS was actively working to destroy competitors through less then honorable tactics, which is why they are viewed as such a tyrant monopoly. On the other hand, Google has just expanded and acquired companies, but has not actively undermined their competitors.
How about people think back at what the antitrust laws are actually intended to prevent. Maybe people would then be able to figure out that Google (and like companies) were not what they were intended to target.
different causes of power
google’s powerful cuz it’s better. microsoft’s powerful because it’s unethical.
Natural monopoly
Google is becoming a natural monopoly in the online search environment by having the best product, tremendous user acceptance, and a host of competitors that users love to hate. That said, inorganic growth of scope may increase the possibility that 5 years from now Google will be such a powerful force in search and advertising that the gov’t will try to break it up.