Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Negotiating With Justice Department

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the they-should-hire-shatner dept.

mikesd81 writes "Cnet reports that to avoid being sued by the US Justice Department, Google is negotiating with them. The Justice Department and a multistate task force are still reviewing the proposal to decide whether to oppose the partnership. Under the non-exclusive partnership Google would supply Yahoo with some search ads, a move that could increase Yahoo search revenue, but that also gives Google even more power in the market. Yahoo expects the 10-year deal to raise revenue by $800 million in its first year and to provide an extra $250 million to $450 million in incremental operating cash flow. Google's share of the US search market reached 71 percent in August, compared with Yahoo's 18.26, according to Hitwise's most recent numbers."

12 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. I fail to see the problem... by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    to avoid being sued by the U.S. Justice Department, Google is negotiating with them

    Okay, Google has 71% of the search engine market... Which itself makes up what, less than 5% of the total world of advertising?

    Oh, boo-hoo, Google can actually tell you how much you have to pay to share their sandbox. Sorry advertisers, but we don't want your "product" in the first place. Go bitch to someone who carres.

    And, advertisers-of-the-world (and other search engines), do you know why Google has 71% of the search engine market? Because Google doesn't piss us off with banners and flash ads and hiding sponsored links as results. Get the hint?

    1. Re:I fail to see the problem... by Spazztastic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And, advertisers-of-the-world (and other search engines), do you know why Google has 71% of the search engine market? Because Google doesn't piss us off with banners and flash ads and hiding sponsored links as results. Get the hint?

      They also provide us with ads that are relevant to the content of the page, rather then something arbitrary.

      --
      Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    2. Re:I fail to see the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This isn't about advertisers being unhappy, it's about the government being unhappy about monopoly power: Wikipedia article

    3. Re:I fail to see the problem... by aredubya74 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm generally wary of monopoly behaviors, but so far, I see nothing monopolistic here. Now, if Google/Yahoo require advertisers who want to run ads on their sites and ad networks to only run on them and nobody else, that's a monopoly practice. It would be equally monpolistic if Google/Yahoo said to a site that wanted to join their ad network "Sure, but you have to sign this agreement that says only Google/Yahoo-networked ads can run on my site". I don't see any such direct allegations though. What am I missing?

      --

      RW

    4. Re:I fail to see the problem... by PJ+The+Womble · · Score: 4, Funny

      Rather quaintly, when I'm cleaning spam out of my GMail account, it shows me a context-based ad for "Spam Casserole Recipe".

    5. Re:I fail to see the problem... by sackeri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Who is the government protecting in this case exactly? If you believe the Justice Department is involved due to benevolence instead of at the request of another corporation with a larger lobbying group, you are seriously being naive.

      The government is intervening on behalf of microsoft for "the good of the people", no doubt about it.

    6. Re:I fail to see the problem... by Jeff+Hornby · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Just like they sued Microsoft on behalf of Sun "for the good of the people".

      The justice department doesn't go out and look for these cases. They only get involved after intense lobbying. And given the Google has a monopoly on search (71% sounds low unless they're including sites that index themselves instead of using an outside service) I would say that the Justice department should be keeping an eye on them.

      Not to mention that Google is looking more and more evil despite their cute slogan. They bought DoubleClick. Does anybody think that they did that because they couldn't reporduce DoubleClick's technology? They wanted the DoubleClick databases going back to the early days of the internet. Combine that historical data with all of the data they have about you (almost every search you've ever made, the contents of your mail if you use GMail, the contents of your documents if you use Google Docs, information about your videos if you post them to YouTube, what news you read if you get it from Google News, where you like to go if you use Google Maps, etc.) The information that Google knows about an individual is staggering. It makes the CIA look like a bunch of amateurs.

      But then, Slashdot likes Google.

      --
      Why doesn't Slashdot ever get slashdotted?
  2. Google's competitors by homer_s · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why are Google's competitors opposing the deal?

    If conventional wisdom about such big mergers - that they will 'corner' the market and increase prices - is correct, then shouldn't the competitors be happy that their competitor will raise prices and hence drive customers to them?

    The obvious conclusion, supported by lots of data for those inclined to look, is that big mergers always increase efficiency and hence reduce prices for the consumer. It is precisely that outcome that terrifies competitors and forces them to rush to government and feign a concern for the well-being of the consumer.

    But why should the new megacorp reduce prices if they have no competitors, you ask? This is only possible if you think that the only competitor to, for example an airline, is another airline. That is false. The airlines compete with cars, trains, USPS, the telephone and lately, in my case, with web-conferencing.

    So it is with *all* other industries.

  3. #1 share in online advertising by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is that really something that needs to be regulated?

  4. So they let MS have a monopoly.... by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But they'll investigate Google after MS cries about fairness?

  5. Summaries should include the important bits! by pjt33 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Cnet reports that to avoid being sued by the U.S. Justice Department, Google is negotiating with them. The Justice Department and a multistate task force are still reviewing the proposal to decide whether to oppose the partnership.

    "The" proposal? "The" partnership? Don't make me RTFA to work out what you're talking about!

  6. Cuil by Wiarumas · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't worry guys, Cuil will soon dominate the market once everyone realizes how vastly superior it is.

    --
    I will bend like a reed in the wind.