Microsoft Complains About Google's Monopoly Abuse

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Frustrated at the FTC's blessing of the Google/Doubleclick merger, Microsoft is complaining to the EU. Its latest filings detail how the merger would give Google a stranglehold on the advertising industry. While these complaints aren't new, the diagram [PDF] Microsoft created gives you an interesting look at the sort of competition Microsoft fears from Google."

Comments

Is this Pandoras Box I see Opening?

[RotateLeftByte]

If Microsoft were to follow this up with legal docmuments, would they not be risking having to provide lots of really sensitive information to Google during Discovery.
That, IMHO is why so far they appear/alledgely have been using proxy companies (something like SCO) in attempts to retain their market share.
If they can still strike deals with H/W Suppliers & Retailers that effectively lock out the competition then this could be their Pandoras Box of absolutely huge proportions.

If on the other hand, they can persuade the DOJ or EU to investigate Google on their behalf, then they would seem safe.

However there could be a sting in the tail. What if, Google then say, Ok, investigate us but do exactly the same to Microsoft.

Personally, I ONLY ever use google as a search engine. I don't pay them money for their services. Adblock+ keeps unwanted adverts at bay so I'm generally pretty happy with their service. But there are still other Search engines out there, including microsoft so I do have an alternative that won't cost me a penny.

Re:What NERVE!

[davidsyes]

"Microsoft is successful today only because of one act - indoctrination: it was conniving enough to wean an entire generation of first-time computer users by making damn sure that, whoever bought a computer, windows would be the first thing they saw."

I seem to remember that ms coerced and threatened manufacturers of PCs to install windows onto them, by 1) making them afraid of being sued as aiding piracy, and 2) by making them think they couldn't sell hardware "missing" an OS.

I also seem to remember them giving PC manufacturers marketing dollars, and allowing retailers to -- for the first decade or so -- get away with unauthorized installation of the OS to make sure there was market penetration.

While I am willing to say windows is a sub-rate product (as are many of "their" products), that's all most of the world knows, and, like sheep, they'll accept that, until Linux or Apple or BSD, et al, erode ms' share of illegally, unethically, immorally-obtained the market.