The Obama Administration’s new chief antitrust enforcer at the Department of Justice, Christine Varney, is making it very clear that she is going to be much more aggressive in bringing antitrust actions against large, American corporations. The Bush Administration took a hands-off approach to antitrust enforcement, and that is about to change. Varney needs a high-profile case to make her name, and all indications are that she is eying Google. After all she needs to make an example out of a big powerful corporate “predator” and in this limping econmy there simply aren’t that many powerful companies to chose from.
Google, quite literally, is the new Microsoft when it comes to antitrust scrutiny (although, Microsoft itself is also still under the magnifying glass, as is Intel, at least in Europe). Even under the Bush Justice Department, last year Google had to drop its advertising deal with Yahoo because of antitrust issues. Today, Google is dealing with an antitrust investigation over to its book-scanning settlement, the newspaper and magazine industries are rattling their sabers, and every other industry facing disruption by the internet is lining up to blame Google for their woes. Varney will be encouraging competitors of all potential antitrust targets to file more complaints, so you can be sure that anti-Google lobby will grow.
Google makes a nice, juicy target and it is one of the few companies with cash on hand to pay a large fine. Google really needs to tread carefully now. It is effectively being treated as a monopoly because of its overwhelming dominance in paid search advertising, which gives it carte blanche to move into other markets with disruptive pricing models (i.e. free). There are many ways an antitrust case could be made against Google (here is one approach). While more scrutiny is not necessarily a bad thing if it serves to keep Google honest, especially in the areas where it is carving out a natural monopoly for itself in search and search advertising, tying up Google with antitrust lawsuits could do more harm than good.
Any antitrust action should really be based on proven consumer harm or predatory pricing, not simply because Google is out-competing other companies. The problem with antitrust lawsuits, particularly in fast-moving industries such as technology, is they take so long to go through the courts that by the time a ruling is handed down the market has moved on (see Microsoft). The market will always do a better job undermining monopolies than the Justice department will. Varney would serve the country better looking at more entrenched industries such agriculture, health care or energy that could use some shaking up. In the technology industry, overturning the status quo is the only way to survive.
impending danger…for on the best companies in the last decade!!
~marvin (somehow I do not sympathize with the administration guys this time!)
One of the biggest aids in digital piracy:
Just Google this:
“Eminem Relapse Rapidshare”
or
“Star Trek Torrent”
See.
Google always games the system, by letter and spirit. Deserves to be fined, only to spend that money on fancies of politicians.
Maybe, Google deserves to be fined. But remember there are always the others who deserve as much as Google. And Varney is not going to do good to the Silicon Valley is the admin team’s target is Google. As Eric says, why not look at other industries if a heavy fine is what they are looking for.
Hey, they get what they deserve! All the tech people were 110% in Obama’s corner, so let them suffer for it! These anti-American socialist hacks running the country now are exactly what you get when you pay no attention to what they CLEARLY said they were going to do before the election. Can’t cry now that they’re doing it.
lol
tell it brother!
i love how the answer to this “horrible economic climate” is to punish those companies who are making a profit.
“The market will always do a better job undermining monopolies than the Justice department will.”
^ exactly, but instead the Obama Administration gets in a tizzy if anybody in the country is unequal. got a great idea? too bad – give us the idea and we’ll split the profits with the rest of America.
Tell me how AdWords price is NOT predatory?
Would be glad to hear ANY real arguments.
Just because nobody has a better product out there does not make it predatory.
So if you have no other murderers and rapists, they ones you have aren’t predatory….
its not. we decide the bid, if you’re unhappy with google try working with yahoo. Their prices are much cheaper.
AdWords pricing is unfair, unjust. In a true Socialist country, you would pay nothing for AdWords, because there would be no Google. Isn’t that wonderdul?
Jackass. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS PREDATORY PRICING THERE IS ONLY PREDATORY GOVERNMENT.
Someone should sue the Stalinists in Washington D.C. under anti-trust violations. The government has a monopoly on committing crime.
I agree with nonsense. Its the consumers that chose google as the SE standard and it is us that are willing to pay for the adwords. Yahoo and ask, and MSN’s cpc bidding model and platforms are the same, so who are we to call google monopolistic or predatory?
Yeah. Unfortunately that type of freedom and logic is despised in America (thanks to public schools) and now we are headed for hell on earth.
People who thought National Socialism was bad under Bush are going to get a dose of what real misery and poverty are like under Obama and hardcore communism.
The bottom line is that government is mental illness and until we deal with the fact that people in this country are very sick, things are only going to get worse.
Stalinists!? That’s quite a claim you’re making, quite an idiotic one too. And though you’re right about the govonment being probably the biggest criminals out there, they generally only do it for the good of thier country. In politics, crime and law it makes sense to spy on people and swindle them out of thier cash, but take too much and you get a kick out the door. Any good govornment knows it’s about striking a balance.
Unfortunatley, the people will never aggree with the govornment 100% of the time. But that’s the whole point of a democracy.
Also, there IS such a thing as predetory pricing. In a business sense it means a large company undercutting a smaller company by taking advantage of the better economies of scale that come with being a large business, therefore pricing them out the market. This however, does not apply to Google as their AdWords are a lot more expencive than some alternatives, and they have every right to as they have made a better (or at least more popular) service which people are willing to pay for.
rich97 said…
And though you’re right about the govonment being probably the biggest criminals out there, they generally only do it for the good of thier country.
Rich97, that’s an idiotic comment. First hurdle for you to overcome is to understand property rights. You can’t violate property rights for the good of the country. There is something called voluntary persuasion and not state coercion. The using anti-trust law against anyone is state coercion.
Rich97 said…
Also, there IS such a thing as predatory pricing.
The following article may enlighten you.
Drop the Antitrust Case Against Microsoft
If the new state sanctioned thuggery boss Christine Varney goes after Google, then Google is tasting a bit of medicine of its own making. Mr Schmidt & Google expressed an interest in joining the anti-trust case against Microsoft in recent months. I see both Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Balmer of Microsoft as cheerleaders of anti-trust. They like anti-trust being used against others but not to themselves.
It is time that our leaders in capitalism such as Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Balmer should unite industries (mainly large corporations) and fight/lobby the government to kill the anti-trust legislations because this beast is anti-capitalism. These capitalist leaders should stop playing games with each others via using the anti-trust laws but unite to fight it. It is unjust and unconstitutional and it should be killed.
I don’t think Obama is a Stalinist. Not at all. But it is ironic that your statement “generally only do it for the good of thier country”, is a tenet of communism. Stalin killed millions of farmers in the name of “the greater good”.
Adwords pricing is based on competitive bidding. Predatory pricing is when you deliberately sell at a loss to drive competitors out of business. Kinda hard to do when the users bids drive the price up.
Should Google or any other company be able to get away with unfair practices? Nope.
But, c’mon, Obama… leave free enterprise alone. Just stick to blowing trillions of dollars on nothing. You’re good at that.
FUCK U
you first?
DIY is always handy
it is not unfair pricing. Fact: if consumers don’t like the way Google does business they are free to go somewhere else. Google would then realize this and lower their prices or improve their practices to compete.
“adwords is not predatory”…what a joke. Why didn’t u do the product ‘adwords’ yourself?? if u find it so predatory. There are people who sell their own ad inventory…check out kayak.com brother and their business model….exactly the same as adwords.
stop selling your attitude against a company which brought out the revolutionary concept.
~ robert
The biggest problem with going after Google is the amount of positive mind-share they have among the general public. I don’t believe that was the case when the Justice Dept. went after Microsoft.
How about going after a monopolist which everyone hates, like TicketMaster?
Don’t worry Mike, they’ll ‘talk them down’ for a few weeks in the press first and get the sheep believing Google is the Great Monster (like anyone else they want to target) … the sheep will fall in lockstep and the Savior will come and save them.
fuck ya… id pay to see those mutherf*ckers burn.
This is great!
I hope Eric is glad he spent so much time kissing Barry Hussein’s butt! Now he gets his payback!
Agreed. LOL. I wonder how good Eric Schmidt is feeling considering he spent the last few years blowing Obama 10 times a day.
Memo to Google: As you are getting screwed by the big O, think happy thoughts about getting the GOP out of Washington. It was a good trade, right? Such is the word of Sanjay.
The Obama administration: bailing out failed companies and targeting successful companies since 2009.
going to have a t-shirt made with that.
would be funny if it weren’t so true
OMG nailed it!
LOL! Dude you rock!
That’s wonderful. So it’s not enough to just to raise corporate taxes, now his administration is going after successful businesses? If it wasn’t for Google’s success some of the very large companies would be out of business (e.g. YouTube). Yes, it’s possible that Google can be bad at times but overall they have pushed the envelop of innovation in computing, energy, search, etc. They’ve also created a lot of jobs by effectively monetizing search and allowing web businesses to serve those ads on their own sites to generate income as well.
This didn’t actually happen (yet). The author was just speculating. People need to go have some tea and relax.
Sure, you could advertise on Yahoo, and lots of businesses do. In fact, the business owners I work with get pretty good results on Yahoo.
But the “perception” is that Google is the only search engine on which to advertise. I’m sure that after some investigation, Varney will realize that advertisers have several choices. They just choose Google.
(Ya know, it’s not unlike one television station having more market share than the others. It’s about consumer choice – something we didn’t have with AT&T back in the day.)
I wonder how much lobbyist action is going toward saving newspaper and tv – and how much that is affecting the witch hunt?
Google is truly just the perceived choice, and for good reason. They shouldn’t be punished.. Hopefully this case will never come about because of that.
keep punishing google for doing well, and maybe they won’t try so hard int eh future.. I’m just afraid all of the antitrust talks are going to start truly hindering the future of social and web search technology..
Its soo sad how instead of cheering for success and being happy for companies who make it, we find ways to penalize them.
America hates success, and this country has become a socialistic country, were becoming more and more like Europe.
Google should be thanked day and night, we should give then prizes and blessings for employing soo many people and giving us such great products in such a bad economy.
If google became to powerful and took advantage of the market, it will go down and loose its power because someone smaller with a better product will beat it, Fortune 100 will and will always fall, but not by stupid government intervention and antitrust laws, but by the consumers or by better companies. google will not be the king forever, any ways leave the company alone.
Anti trust NO
sarbanes oxley NO
We need to let companies do their thing especially in this bad economy.
Speculation or not this is still the kind of stiff that always seems to happen. If you get yourself involved in too may different pots…the man will shut you down. The only way to may that kinda of money is to stick to one thing and do it soooo well that no one can shut you down. Google’s problem is they are all over everything and that scares these people into a frenzy. http://www.tech...over-world.html
Wow… there’s some angry folks out there.
First, this is not the Obama adminstration, this is Obama’s pick for Chief Justice. That’s all. You could argue that her agendas are his because he picked her, but at the end of the day, he likely picked her for her qualifications in other areas, not because he wanted a bulldog to go after Google. That’s her agenda, and who knows what her own personal reasons are for that agenda. This isn’t Russia, the president doesn’t get to tell the Justice Department what to pursue or not, pursue after all.
Second, arguing that AdWords costs too much is nothing more than unintelligent whining. It costs as much as it does because it’s market driven and the market is driving it up. Want costs to go down? Convince everyone to stop using it. Otherwise shut up or use a competitor so you can drive their prices up.
Third, the fact that Google is the presumed target speaks pretty clearly that the Chief Justice juts wants a high profile kill. There’s no legimate cause of action (at least for those of us who aren’t 10 feet deep in our own egos). And, as suggested, TicketMaster would be a much more worthwhile target. Heck, even Microsoft could stand to have their knuckles racked a little more.
With all respect and regardless of any personal endorsements of Obama, you are deluding yourself if you think he doesn’t give his tacit approval to such activities.
Just like there’s no way he didn’t know about the Air Force One flight over NYC in advance.
Just like there’s no way Bush didn’t know about the Dubai ports deal in advance (or the Plame leak, or rendering etc etc).
There is no passing the buck when you’re pres. And I’m pretty sure he’d be briefed long before a senior member of his team launched anti-trust investigations against Google.
“The market will always do a better job undermining monopolies than the Justice department will.”
Is there any evidence to support this statement? A situation where the Justice department was trying to break up a monopoly, failed to do it, then quit trying and the monopoly was broken up by the market? I can’t think of any situation where that has happened.
In fact it seems to me that a monopoly is a structure which will not be unseated by the free market almost by definition. That is, if other firms could compete with and unseat the monopoly, it wouldn’t be a monopoly.
I don’t know that is inevitable that a monopoly will form in any market if left undisturbed for long enough, but it clearly it is possible and has happened numerous times in the U.S. over the past couple hundred years.
It would suck to see Google bullied into not providing as many cool free services though.
Andy said…
In fact it seems to me that a monopoly is a structure which will not be unseated by the free market almost by definition.
One simple question for you. Who were the dominant players in search before Google emerges?
Why would Christine Varney go after Google. All this is silly. Especially when Obama wanted The Google CEO Eric Schmidt on board.
hah well.. Maybe the government is maintaining appearances, and this would be there way of making sure people don’t worry about gubmint/google compromised antitrust laws.
Let’s see…. Schmidt promotes Obama’s presidency. Obama looks to raise taxes that would drastically impact Google AND go after Google for anti-trust violations.
The irony is delicious.
Sounds like the shareholders of Google may want to impart some violations of their own… on Eric Schmidt. And by “violate” I mean in ways that are illegal in some states.
Also sounds like all the comrades that voted for the Socialist in Chief are getting exactly what they asked for.
Pretty sure rape is illegal in every state.
The role of an antitrust enforcer is a state sanction thuggery. It is no different from mob thuggery. The difference is that one is legal (antitrust enforcer) and the other one is illegal (mob thuggery). Both thuggeries have one thing in common. They violate property rights. The rights to one’s properties are not his/hers anymore. In terms of private businesses, their properties belong to the consumers and not the business entities themselves, ie, they can’t do what they like with their own properties and the antitrust laws are there to enforce them. On the other hand mob agents threaten or exhort private owners to pay them regular fees out of their businesses regular take or else. The private business owners can’t have a say, since mob agents will deal to them .The 2 thuggeries are the same, but one is legal and the other is illegal. There are leftists cheerleaders everywhere, including politicians who support legalized thuggery (even some on this thread) and that’s a sad indictment because such legalized thuggery is anti-capitalism.
Congratulations Democrats. First you sign legislation to print trillions of dollars, then you start assaulting American companies, the only entities that create wealth and make our dollars worth more than Monopoly money.
–Kudos to the truly clueless folks who think that such actions are the way to go to get us out of a recession, maybe you’ll realize what you’ve done to American business and the economy when the massive stagfation and debased currency effects cause bread to cost 10 bucks a loaf, morons.
Rich97 said…
But that’s the whole point of a democracy.
This is the mistake that the majority of the population held, because it elevates mob rule (rule by majority as your definition) as something more important than property rights. Here is a good explanation of what I mean.
Abhorrence of Democracy and Mob Rule
I suggest you read it, then think about it carefully. Anti-trust laws are designed based on mob rule, ie, your property is there for the interests of the majority and not the owner/s.
I’m surprised there’s no mention of Apple.
Apple, who have a 90% monopoly with the iPod.
Apple, who lock you into iTunes (ok, there are other vendors, but users don’t know – it’s IE all over again).
Apple, who forbid transfer of your own tracks.
Perhaps this proves Google isn’t as cool as Apple. Watch for the violent defense of Apple following this comment…
Kenneth said…
Apple, who lock you into iTunes
Apple doesn’t hold a gun to your head, never in the first place and never during your usage of their services/products and I am sure that a 5 year old can really understand this, which is obvious.
Kenneth said…
violent defense of Apple following this comment…
I am defending your rights to enjoy and do whatever you like with what you own and that is a legitimate rights. I will cheer for you or side with you if someone is trying to violate your rights to your own properties. The rights to one’s properties is irrelevant whether the properties are yours Kenneth , Joe the Plumber or big corporations. They are all property rights and it should be protected by law and not violate them by using the anti-trust.
Wow it’s amazing the google objs for 10′
well.. it is true that other search engines are doing that too and you know what, that doesn’t make it kosher. it’s like saying, every firm on wall street is doing this mortgage thing so it has to be valid. No, it is NOT valid. On top of all that, google is a monopoly in the internet search and that makes it even worse.
Google can make it legal very easily:
1. sign contract agreements with every web site that they are taking any kind of content from; this is the way the business is done in America, via an agreement that BOTH sides agree on.
2. The Agreement must clearly state that google does not violate any trademark or content rights – people spend money to build an image, relationships and links/associations for their brands – google has no right to infringe upon those rights.
3. Stop butchering people’s trademarks by giving web site operators the tools to have complete control over their trademarks including image, relationships and links/associations for their brands as well as the option to have no competitor advertise in association with their brands.
This is common sense
Welcome to a Revived Theodore Roosevelt Administration “Progressive Through and Through”
Elections have Consequences. When you have a ignorant populas well your blinded! by charm and promises…….
The pricing is hardly predatory, if the price did not produce a return on investment wouldn’t you simply market elsewhere?
I think it is also important to take into consideration the social good that google produces from offering awesome and free services like google documents.
@Daniel Buchner, @Falafulu Fisi thank god there are still capitalists out there that know that at the end of the day free markets and in turn companies is what gives us jobs and gives us a better life NOT OBAMA, Yes We Can and Hope will not come from him or any other president, governments are here to protect us from each other and out side invaders, not give us jobs, Comanies give us jobs, companies create products, etc etc.
it seems to me that people who defend google never actually used it.. there is absolutely NO transparency for what google pays a web site. google ‘tells’ the site what they pay for, NO way to verify or control if they are telling the truth or not.
in my experience, they are not telling the truth to anyone, including the google investors.
I highly recommend the following book for those who are cheerleaders for the anti-trust laws. The book will enlighten the thoughts of those who are anti-capitalist. Here is my favourite quote from the book:
Ludwig Von Mises quoted:
To the grumbler who complains about the unfairness of the market system only one piece of advice can be given: If you want to acquire wealth, then try to satisfy the public by offering them something that is cheaper or which they like better. Try to supersede Pinkapinka by mixing another beverage. Equality under the law gives you the power to challenge every millionaire. It is in a market not sabotaged by government-imposed restrictions exclusively your fault if you do not outstrip the chocolate king, the movie star and the boxing champion.
It is available for order from Amazon:
The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality
“..Equality under the law gives you the power to challenge every millionaire. It is in a market not sabotaged by government-imposed restrictions exclusively your fault if you do not outstrip the chocolate king, the movie star and the boxing champion.”
..
who wrote this book, micky-mouse?
first it says “Equality under the law gives you the power to challenge every millionaire. ” and then it contradicts iself right in the next sentence “It is in a market not sabotaged by government-imposed restrictions..”
–
who creates the equality under the law if not government-imposed restrictions..?
–
sometimes, I wonder..
good quote
Average Joe,
Your comment is idiotic and deserve no response from me. However, I am happy to give you a brief hint.
What you own is yourself alone and not for others to demand a right to restrict you from what you can or can’t do with it? You get that? That is the equality of the law. To recognize that your property is yours and it doesn’t belong to your competitors or consumers. If the state thinks that your property is not yours (ie, laws that restricts you from what you can do with it), then that is not equality. I hope that it is clear now.
or maybe your selection of the quote is idiotic, have you considered that?
and speaking of property laws.. Google is vandalizing the property of others in every way it can..
falafulu, thank haven that the government imposes laws that gives ALL of us, the freedom of speach..
aren’t you happy
Google’s CEO was one of Obama’s top advisers during the campaign. A strong antitrust suit with heavy penalties is not going to happen.
The thing I most wonder about is whether or not the Obama administration’s actions will – in any way – teach or require the teaching of correct spelling in blog comments.
Alas, the people targeted in this comment have no idea who they are.
Back on topic….
Those in the forefront will always attract the most attention. If you REALLY want to topple Google, then build something better. Last time I checked the U.S. was a capitalistic society. Did I miss something?
Build, compete and (hopefully) win. Either that or eat the sour grapes that the losers would have you chow down on. Any administration that is motivated to curb innovation and competition is, well, [insert f-bomb, with proper tense, here].
Oh, and did I mention the spelling thing, (don’t EVEN try to get me on grammar stuff – my whole thing is with the spelling!
)?
Peace!
hiding behind big words like ‘capitalism’ and ‘free market’ or ‘build something better’.. a full load of bull.. google is screwing up the market and you know it and soon enough they will have to pay for it. there is no frikin ‘free market’ when someone steal as much property from other as google does..
my advice to you: stick to editing. we do the writing and you do the editing. you might be doing a much better job at that..
Name something Google stole.
So many down right hateful comments here that it makes me sad for my country. We had a President basically destroy our economy and our democracy for eight years, I never saw as much complaining as I do now.
During eight years we saw the price of oil sky rocket to $4 gallon, the baby bells rejoin, big companies like Monsanto become more abusive. Yet I’m sure many of you think this was a great time?
When Intel conspires with PC makers to delay a competitors products and gives them kickbacks to do so that isn’t free market. That is the big player in the market distorting the market for their own gain. The only way to stop this is for government intervention.
Some of you may be laughing or calling me a hypocrite as I call myself a libertarian and some of you may say let the free markets prevail. We tried that for eight years and our banking system nearly collapsed when we let the free market prevail.
The free market was a good idea back when we were a small colony but now we are a global economy. A truly free economy can’t compete with the likes of China who pays workers next to nill and have practically no safety standards unless we are willing to move backwards and live like many Chinese do or impose trarrifs to even things out (which is against free market principals).
If we have a truly free market like some want, what if the cell phone companies get together (ya companies have never done this..) and set their prices to be the same but set them $25/month, where the collude and don’t compete. Then they buy up the little rural carriers just for good measure. It isn’t like someone can just setup a new nation-wide cell phone carrier tomorrow to compete.
Free market is a great idea like a utopian society but it is as real as a Unicorn.
As for the Republican haters on this thread grow up and read your history of the last eight years. We had a president who gave away billions of dollars in no bid contracts and put us into a steep recession. Quit pretending your guys was any better, he wasn’t and he was much much worse.
To those of you who think that Republicans are better than Democrats or that Democrats are better than Republicans, shame on you. They are all the same and are all owned by the rich. While you disagree about things like gay marriage, gun ownership, marijuana legalization this country has been raped and pillaged.
The gov is just upset that Google pawns them at their own game. They can retain data and the government salivates. In all honesty I think they should be going after companies like Comcast, AT&T or Cox/Rogers. Basically the companies that have a monopoly and band together to keep prices high or set low prices that they won’t go below.
I agree Google is big and I don’t agree with everything they do but they innovate and that’s why their user base grows. If it wasn’t for Google I’d be using Hotmail or Yahoo search again. OMG I’d die!
google ‘innovates’? that is a myth cultivated by the big pockets of google’s backers.
what exactly has ever google invented? nothin, zero, zilch, nada..
google ‘the innovator’ haha ha..give me a frikin brake
there are no studies NO proof that the billions thye charge in click money produce ANY economic value.
it may be the biggest scam that ever was.. people are payin for clicks just because the competition is.. do thye get any benefit? nobody knows.
Google sets minimum pricing for adwords and does little to nothing to monitor and clean up click fraud. They clearly are abusing their dominant search position.
They are also keeping competition out by giving away tons of software for free in exchange for getting to even more private consumer information.
Google has earned lots of scrutiny by the Justice department and is much more of a threat to consumers in general than Microsoft ever was.
also, they do not disclose to content providers what they pay for. clearly, google could be charging the advertisers for clicks and the may not be paying the click suppliers their share. abuse plain and simple – as monopolistic as it can get
thats just silly…Google created paid search advertising. you cant be charge of an anti-law suit for something you invented. Can you?
…and you used literally wrong. they’re not literally microsoft. Its not possible for one company to actually BE another. get a handle on yourself :p
google never ‘created’ nothin!! all google has ever done was to steal steal steal.. then use the big pockets of their backers to force themses into the market.
without yahoo and aol givg google distribution early on, they would be nowhere where they are today. all because their backers.
betteer technolog, my foot.
we know google is yesterday’s technology and they are just blocking any kind of innovation in this space.
it is time for the gov to step in and give the market the equal right it deserves..
thats just silly…Google created paid search advertising. you cant be charge of an anti-law suit for something you invented. Can you?
…and you used literally wrong. they’re not literally microsoft. Its not possible for one company to actually BE another. get a handle on yourself :p
OH! You’re my new favorite blogger fyi
Warren Buffet calls Google “Sharks and Crocodiles” company “that no one can get near”. Frightening –> http://bit.ly/cwT4D
if everyone will behave like Google, it will be the end of our civilized world. It’ll be the Leviathan world. –> http://bit.ly/Kw6AA
news:
Google Sued: Class Action Over Trademarked Keyword Ads
– google never invented anything, they are just thieves trying to get away with as much as possible. also, they never disclose their illegal practice in the public disclosures to their shareholders
news:
An Illinois software developer is suing Google and 47 other international corporations for using the word “Android” to describe its open-source mobile operating system. In the lawsuit, Erich Specht is claiming “it is clear that Google stole first and asked questions later.”
google fraud all over the place..
It’s about time the justice department puts Google on alert. Look at what Google was trying to do with Yahoo, and how Google aggressively copies everyone else’s search features whenever it can.
How about bundling and pushing every new product through it’s search engine (google local, google news, youtube, google base, etc.)? That’s just like what Microsoft did to Netscape.
Anyone here born before 1970 ? A few I see … maybe….
Predatory
No they are balanced in the scoring of all information
Murderers
No they don’t kill information that has not a PPC
Rapists
Ah no they cannot be.. . they are just a search engine.
Who the F gives about search. Search is great if it returns the meaning of life. Asking my friend yesterday, “Is this how you felt your life would turn out” answer > yup…….
Is google so much cooler than Hank from king of the hill ? I think not