Slashdot Mirror


FTC To Open Antitrust Investigation Against Google

itwbennett writes "According to a report in the Wall Street Journal, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is preparing to serve subpoenas to Google as a first step in a broad antitrust investigation focusing on whether Google search is unfairly driving traffic to its other sites. Representatives of Google and the FTC declined to comment on the report, although an FTC spokesperson did deny that the report came from them."

22 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. Stupidity by RazzleFrog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So can we next have a suit against NBC for unfairly putting commercials for their shows ahead of other networks? I realize that Google has become ubiquitous but there are other search engines. I don't see how it is unreasonable for Google to promote their own brand on their page.

    1. Re:Stupidity by AdmiralXyz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't see how it is unreasonable for Google to promote their own brand on their page.

      And Microsoft probably didn't see why it was unreasonable to promote their own browser on their operating system. Antitrust legislation is about more than promotion: it prevents you from your dominance in one market to muscle competitors out of a different market. Whether or not Google is actually running afoul of antitrust laws, I don't know, but it's definitely a possibility: you don't think it's possible that so many people are using Google Docs instead of other cloud document editing services because it's right on Google's homepage?

      --
      Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
    2. Re:Stupidity by RazzleFrog · · Score: 3, Informative

      I actually thought the Microsoft thing was ridiculous, too. IE didn't need an anti-trust suit to reduce its marketshare. Anybody could download a different browser and when better browser came out people did.

    3. Re:Stupidity by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People forget the MS would change the underlying layer to give there browser an advantage. THAT was the real problem.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:Stupidity by fast+turtle · · Score: 2

      Not only did MS strong arm OEM's to keep alternative browsers off the desktop but the also strong armed them to keep alternative OS's such as Linux from being available.

      How many of us would have bought a business server with *nix and Apache installed instead of Windows and IIS? All of that was part of using their monopoly to kill any competition.

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    5. Re:Stupidity by DJRumpy · · Score: 2

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act

      They used their market dominance to attempt to strong arm PC manufacturers into bundling only I.E. in the O.S. and threatened those that were considering bundling other alternative browsers.

      The very definition of anti-competetive.

    6. Re:Stupidity by mutewinter · · Score: 2

      Ben Edelman has done a truly exceptional job documenting the anti-trust issues involving Google's advertising.

      NBC is not a monopoly, Google is. Google makes Microsoft's old monopoly look like a walk in the park. Google not only has the most used search engine but controls or has a majority chunk of the online advertising market flow through it (at least in the US, I'm sure there are exceptions on a country by country basis.) Additionally they now have what is likely to be come the #1 mobile phone operating system and potentially what could become the #1 web browser.

      People go to Google to look for stuff. Lets say your business advertises on Google (mine does), and Google wants to do the same thing as your business does. Thanks to either their existing infrastructure or that you are advertising on their platform they know everything about how your business gets traffic. With the wave of a magic wand all of those search keywords and display ad placements are now directly to Google's new competitive service. I have seen Google do this in multiple markets, including my own. How do you compete against Google? You can't. Virtually every user wanting something specific comes from search.

      That is an incredibly powerful monopoly, much more so than Microsoft's was.

      Areas Google has already used this to their advantage: Google News (vs multiple news sites), Google Finance (Yahoo Finance and others), Google Shopping (infinite shopping sites), Google Health (WebMD etc), Google Places (remember the whole Yelp review jacking thing), and so on.

      Unlike Microsoft, Google is actually putting out exceptional products and I am very thankful for that. But, a monopoly is a monopoly, and if anti-competitive practices are involved (strongly likely) US law has something to say about that. Thus any disagreement with this issue lays with US law rather than Google or the FTC.

      By the way, I strongly recommend what Ben Endelman has written about this subject. I would take a guess he figured this out first.

      http://www.benedelman.org/searchbias/
      http://www.benedelman.org/hardcoding/ (If I recall correctly Google was caught here telling lies)
      http://www.benedelman.org/news/092810-1.html

  2. priorities by itchythebear · · Score: 2

    So Google pushing their own services to voluntary users of it's free service warrants an anti-trust investigation, but for some reason net neutrality isn't taken seriously by hardly anyone in washington?

    What a joke.

    --
    If what I just said sounded like a troll, it was probably just a failed attempt at humor.
  3. Another waste of time and money... by callit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    yep. keep rubberstamping deals like nbc-comcast and the soon to be att-t-mobile. Ignore the consistent anti-consumer policies of most ISPs and cable operators... and waste time on a company supporting its own business model in a way that barely affects consumers, but may impact other companies? Why is the government so anti-consumer and pro-corporation right now? Just how much money does it take to buy a senator anyway?

    1. Re:Another waste of time and money... by Dutchmaan · · Score: 2

      Our government is nothing more than a proxy for large corporations to use to "compete" Google is gaining strength fast, and those companies that have deep connections in DC are likely the ones who are ultimately pulling the levers. I find it interesting though, that from my perspective, conservatives seem to be very anti-Google and pro-MS. Not sure why, nor do I know if it's even true.. just seems that way to me. But by and large the media companies and communication companies seem to be very strong these days.. and Google is a threat to them, so it doesn't surprise me that there is a government "investigation" happening.

  4. Re:Good by hedwards · · Score: 2

    Doesn't matter whether there are more egregious violations around or not. It's been pretty clear for some time that Google has been violating antitrust laws for a while now and that the online advertising space has gotten distinctively less competitive as a result. I'm just surprised that it took this long for an investigation to begin.

  5. lulz by decora · · Score: 2

    dude.

    you realize that blogspot blogs are not the best blogs, right? and that they pop up top 10 for a very specific reason, right?

    1. Re:lulz by geekoid · · Score: 2

      They are the most popular.
      Best is subjective.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  6. Re:What's Their Problem? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

    Yeah, because Google could never possibly do anything wrong. I mean their motto even says so, right?

  7. Re:Good by Hylandr · · Score: 2

    So if I run a company that advertises I can't advertise my other companies?

    F* Them...

    - Dan.

    --
    ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
  8. Re:Give Free Stuff Away by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 2

    Isn't Gmail recognized as mostly the best free email? They had to beat out incumbents Yahoo, Hotmail, and AOL.

    They bought Google Earth and started working on Street View. There's your geo angle.

    Your choice of a third app they remade into the best.

    Is it a sin when the same company gains dominance by winning multiple categories?

    And yes, if we're playing lawsuit dominance games, include Apple and Facebook in the fun too.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  9. Wait a minute... by Demerara · · Score: 4, Funny

    The agency's five-member panel of commissioners is preparing to send its formal demands for information to Google within days, these people said

    Can't they simply google the information?

    --
    Backward%20compatibility%20is%20over-rated
  10. Are you fucking kidding me? by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No one gives a shit about the media conglomerates and the ISP Monopolies that threaten the Internet economy, but google tailoring search to their end user's habits to make the searches more reliant is some how a bad thing for the market?

  11. Re:Good by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you're a monopoly, you can't leverage that monopoly to push your other products anti-competitively.

    What does Google have a monopoly on? Ad space? Facebook, Microsoft and Apple all would like to disagree. Search engine? The cost to switch to a different search engine is exactly zero.
    Merely claiming that Google is a monopoly means absolutely nothing. You're going to have to demonstrate why Google is a monopoly first. No one has done that without resorting to brand-new definitions of the word monopoly and market.

    One example would be Google's hard-coded results for specific search terms that place its services at the top of the page regardless of their actual popularity (e.g., Google Finance appearing over the more popular Yahoo Finance, complete with a unique visual presentation).

    No, it isn't. Google specifically marks out the area above its search results as the sponsored area. There is absolutely no way to confuse the chart that appears as the result of a search for a stock ticker symbol as part of the general page. Not to mention that right underneath the Google Finance chart are links to other chart services. In the search results themselves, Yahoo Finance does come out on top. Are you going to complain as well that on the page where Google search results are displayed, there are links to log in to your Google account, access Google Docs and what not? You probably are. In which case, please explain why any other company is allowed to display links to its properties on a page it owns. Start with Microsoft and Apple.

    I have to say, it's interesting how some people's attitudes change when the company involved isn't Microsoft.

    No, it really isn't. Not unless you build a few strawmen.

    Google is a gigantic advertising company that happens to hand out free services to get your personal data indexed for their network.

    True.

    They exploit the positive connotation of "open source" and other causes in order to appeal to a certain type of techie, but their motives are just as impure as Microsoft's (and their search engine is as closed source and proprietary as Windows).

    No. They appeal to the techie crowd because their products are pretty friggin awesome.

    I'm not really sure why they're afforded the benefit of the doubt by so many fans.

    Because they have consistently met high expectations. Other companies have not.

    For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure this "Google is an evil monopoly campaign" has been started by various companies who got bloodied by it. You're either shilling for them, or swallowed their crap hook, line and sinker.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  12. Re:Good by Hylandr · · Score: 2

    I support the position postulated by Neutron Cowboy and would like to add two things myself.

    1. They *do* use open source, and 2, This kind of action is much more like what MS would do in the first place. If they can't buy it and bury it they litigate it to oblivion. This may be where the big dogs enter the civil war that's been playing out in our courtrooms. Personally, I want to be fighting for the Google.

    - Dan.

    --
    ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
  13. Re:Be leery of google by macshit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Er, sure, but be much, much, more leery of Google's enemies -- you know, the ones that are lobbying for investigations like this.

    Because the alternative to Google isn't (in the short term) some scrappy and lovable FOSS underdogs, it's vast evil entities like Microsoft and Facebook.

    Addendum: Be very scared.

    --
    We live, as we dream -- alone....
  14. simple by TheSync · · Score: 2

    Keep government out of my Google!