Is The Justice Dep't Really Thinking About Going After All Of Google's Business On Antitrust?

from the political-extortion dept

We've been somewhat confused by the talk of an antitrust action against Google for its ad deal with Yahoo (which doesn't seem likely to raise prices despite what critics say). However, it's become increasingly clear that the gov't is very likely going to move ahead with this. As we already noted, the Justice Dep't has already hired a well-known outside attorney to lead the charge. It seems unlikely that they would do that if they weren't planning to make a big splash. Plus, news is spreading that the Justice Department is already sharing info on its case with California's Attorney General and potentially other state Attorneys General as well.

Now comes the news that the Justice Department isn't just thinking about stopping the ad deal between Yahoo and Google, but in going after Google in general as a monopolist. This is positively ridiculous, and is clearly politically motivated and funded by companies who simply don't like Google. Yet, nowhere has there been any evidence that Google's size has been used to abuse pricing power or to make things more expensive for consumers. Rather, almost everything it's done has been to make things easier or cheaper for consumers.

Unfortunately, it appears that in this politically motivated world, where Google didn't "play the game," a bunch of politicians and Justice Department officials want to charge Google with the crime of "being too successful." Honestly, that's about all they seem likely to have on the company, because it's hard to see how it's abused its monopoly power in a way that actually harms consumers or prevents competition from entering the market.

Filed Under: antitrust, justice department, monopolies, politics, search
Companies: google

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    nukturnal, 12 Sep 2008 @ 3:35am

    I just dont understand

    Frankly I am no supporter of public opinion and I respect everybody's opinion as much as they do to mine.

    Google is everyones favorite and I understand clearly why people immediately take sides when Google's name is painted with mud. Google has grown into a very huge company, nobody can deny that fact, their size and huge pockets has allowed them to make acquisitions of some top companies and products to further expand their reach, I hardly saw anybody saying Google is killing businesses, Google bought Urchin renamed it to Google Analytics and made it Free, what do you think that did to Urchin's competitors? It automatically kills them off, since Google can rely on other numerous sources for revenue.

    Google Chrome did NOT achieve such publicity simply because it was superior to FireFox, IE or Safari, they got that publicity NOT because people have used it over and over again and can tell how good it really is like the case of Firefox, it was simply because Google is everybody's favorite search engine and company and that helped them to have such a user base to take on chrome, Firefox did not make such headlines 4 years ago?

    There is this Great Web App company in Australia called interspire, they had an application called FastFind (a custom easy-to-use search engine for your website), they were doing great, of cause it was nothing even close to what Google is doing but they found a nitch and they took advantage of it, Google suddenly released custom search, now that is very very innovative but what will that mean for companies doing custom search for websites already since once again its FREE.

    Did you see what Nokia did with Symbian? They bought it and made it Free and that to a very large extent affected the Android platform Google was pushing even tough android was also Free it lacked the user base like Symbian.

    Let's not confuse innovation with business ethics and monopoly, Google is an extremely innovative company, but they should be a bit ethical since some of their practices either directly or indirectly hinders other competitors.

    So yes, size does matter when it comes to monopoly issues coz it can directly or indirectly affect competitors. The post and some of the comments would have been very different should it have been Microsoft. People are becoming too emotionally attached to companies that they immediately write off any thing that has to do with Dirt. its understandable

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown for basic formatting. (HTML is not supported.)
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.