Google Makes Case to Join Microsoft Antitrust Case

Rob writes "Computer Business Review magazine is reporting that Google has filed papers with the US district judge overseeing Microsoft's compliance with its 2002 antitrust settlement, outlining why it believes it has a special interest in helping to ensure Microsoft remains in compliance. The judge has declined Google's assistance. From the article: 'Google had complained that the search engine built into Vista constituted "middleware" under the terms of the antitrust settlement and that Microsoft was therefore extending its desktop monopoly into a new market. While Microsoft insisted Google's complaint is "without merit" it did agree in late June to make a number of changes to its Vista search engine with Windows Vista Service Pack 1 to give rival desktop search software, including Google Desktop, a more level playing field.'"

Comments

Re:And how is OSX Spotlight any different?

[morgan_greywolf]

The difference is that the 'small' company in Cupertino, CA, is not a convicted monopolist. The court in question ruled that Microsoft created and abused an illegal monopoly in the computer operating system business. In fact, by embedding Internet Explorer into Windows, they effectively killed Netscape. That's why they are barred from embedding the functionality of other software markets into their OS and Apple most definitely is not. Google is just saying that this behavior is identical to its previous behavior and that they should also be barred from doing it.

anti-competitive Vs features!

[SolusSD]

I am not a fan of microsoft-- in fact i refuse to use windows or give my money to microsoft in any way-- but i think that they should have the right to include whatever they want in *their* OS as long as it isn't intentionally crippling another companies product or using anti-competitive practices to steal the market from a competitor. For example-- back in the day microsoft shipped a microsoft branded java virtual machine that implemented things just a tad differently. People started programming for microsoft's JVM instead of Sun's JVM, effectively attempting to steal the java market from Sun.

Google's motivation: targeted advertising ...

[AHumbleOpinion]

I'm going to offer a tangent given that many /.'s misunderstand Google. Google is not really a "search" company, they are a targeted advertising company. Searches are just a means to build profiles on us, as is gmail. Microsoft and Google are fighting over who gets to profile us and collect the targeted advertising revenue streams. Basically who will websites pay to find out which ad banners to show us.

Re:sorry we'll refix it after a few months. promis

[mhall119]

And what's wrong with that? It's their damn product. Of COURSE they're going to try to promote it above all else. Do you not do this with your products? Or if you aren't self-employed, does your company not do this? If you don't like it, you're free to use a competitor's product. There is nothing wrong with Microsoft trying to promote their product, and trying to keep their marketshare. The problem comes in when they accomplish this not by keeping their own product better than the competition, but by keeping the competition from getting better than their own product.

In this case, instead of simply making a better desktop search for Windows to compete with Google, Microsoft created a desktop search that interferes with the performance of Google's offering. Similarly, Vista's security lets Microsoft's inferior antivirus run properly, but interferes with the operation of other AV products. Tell me how you, as a consumer, benefit from that.