Print 40 comment(s) - last by nycromes.. on May 11 at 12:20 PM

Google is coming under increasing scrutiny thanks to its market dominance

When it comes to antitrust concerns, one name typically springs to mind -- Microsoft. The massive software company has faced allegations of blocking competition repeatedly over the years. Microsoft isn’t alone in fighting antitrust issues in America and some view Google as the next possible monopoly.

Reuters reports that Google is more than a successful technology company; it's a cultural icon as well. With the size and dominance of the search and advertising giant, the government is increasingly looking at Google to be sure that none of its practices are stifling competition in the market.

Evan Stewart of Zuckerman Spaeder said, "The point is that if we're going to maintain that competitive position, it can't be because we allow one entity to become a complete monopolist."

One example of the increasing scrutiny Google is under, despite the fact that Google CEO Eric Schmidt is an outspoken Obama supporter, is the alleged investigation into Google and Apple board members. The government is looking closely at the deal Google has brokered with the Authors Guild and Association of American Publishers that would allow it to create a huge online library as well.

Google so far has been reluctant to raise the ire of regulators and has chosen to walk away from deals with potential antitrust issues. One example is Google walking away from the Yahoo search partnership when regulators said that investigation and opposition to the deal might be warranted.

No one is saying that Google has done wrong at this point, merely that the company could become a monopoly with its aggressive plans and market dominance.

Google's Adam Kovacevich said, "We understand that any time a company is successful, there's a certain degree of scrutiny that comes with the territory."

Bert Foer, head of the American Antitrust Institute told Reuters, "It's not that Google has necessarily done anything wrong. It's not that it's bad or poorly intentioned. It's playing such a large role in the flow of information and has so much free cash to play with and so many creative and aggressive ideas that it presents potential problems regarding... privacy and competition."

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Time to break them up
By Motoman on 5/8/2009 11:30:53 AM , Rating: 5
Google's services are totally interchangeable with other similar services without penalty.

Don't want to use Google's search engine? Use or something else. Same thing.

Don't want to use Google Office? Use Open Office, StarOffice, whatever. Same thing.

Don't want to use Google Maps? Use Mapquest.

Don't want to use Google Chrome? Use Opera, or FireFox.

Whatever. Microsoft is/was/probably always will be a monopoly because in order to really functionally participate in the computing world, you really have little choice other than to use Windows. Google is not in the same position, and unless they just buy-out or crush all other options into dust (which they might), they will not ever be in the same position.

RE: Time to break them up
By Smilin on 5/8/2009 1:13:51 PM , Rating: 2
What if I want to advertise in searchresults?

RE: Time to break them up
By Motoman on 5/8/2009 1:27:18 PM , Rating: 3
Call me crazy, but I reckon other search engines offer paid advertising too.

RE: Time to break them up
By Xavier434 on 5/8/2009 1:38:07 PM , Rating: 5
The main flaw here is that you are not considering businesses that rely a lot on the web which is becoming more and more common. Every business that relies on the web is primarily concerned with one thing and they always ask the same question:

"How do I show up at the top of Google's search results?"

They never ask how to get to the top of They rarely ask how to get to the top of Yahoo either. It is always Google because they know that if they are to become successful then they must get up there on the search results for the most common words and phrases related to their business. If more users opted to use other search engines more often then that wouldn't be an issue, but I just don't see that happening. People don't want to switch because they are very comfortable. I am not sure whether or not I consider this a problem or not yet, but this is how it is.

It is the same with MS except MS makes the end user pay for their OS.

RE: Time to break them up
By Motoman on 5/8/2009 1:46:01 PM , Rating: 1
Getting to the top of any search engine, Google or otherwise, is the same process. You don't do anything different.

RE: Time to break them up
By Xavier434 on 5/8/2009 1:56:17 PM , Rating: 3
Yes and no. Some of the methods to get to the top are generally universal while others are engine specific. For example, creating a standard site map is something pretty much all search engines will pick up with their spiders which helps you get higher in the result lists. On the other hand, you can also pay individual search engines money for priority when it comes to certain key words and phrases for a certain period of time to try and "get to the top" so to speak. The majority of businesses choose to pay Google over other search engines regardless of actual quality because Google is what the majority of users use.

But again, that is not as a result of anything foul that Google has done. They are a great engine and a great business in general. They got really popular and people got very comfortable with them just like they got comfortable with Windows and IE. They will not switch for the same reasons they won't switch their OS or web browser.

RE: Time to break them up
By Motoman on 5/8/2009 1:58:47 PM , Rating: 2
In that regard though, it's not really any different than charting the popularity of, say, CBS vs. NBC. When CBS does better stuff, more people watch them than NBC. If CBS screws up, NBC's viewership goes up.

Pre-Google, Yahoo and others were exceedingly popular. Google became more popular because people liked it better. In the future, if Google screws up, or of someone else comes out with something better, the flock will move along.

RE: Time to break them up
By Xavier434 on 5/8/2009 2:31:29 PM , Rating: 5
You might be right. I am not certain which is why I mentioned in my original post that I really don't now if this is a bad thing or not yet. Here is the potential problem with your theory:

Unlike the rules of competition between a lot of other comparable products and services, Google and search engines in general rely a lot more on people's comfort. The features and quality of service is very important too, but comfort is where it is all at. What happens when you are dealing with this kind of industry is that making a "better" product is often not enough to be competitive even if the existence of your product becomes common knowledge. The reason is that even though your product/service might technically be better than the "other guy" it is the users that ultimately decide and they more often than not choose to stick with what makes them comfortable. For most users, that choice "feels" like higher quality regardless of the reality. The same cannot be said about many other types of products and services out there. None have as much power that Google does over the economy and people's lives in general either...except for maybe Windows.

However, you are spot on when you talk about the possibilities of Google "screwing up". Google could change things suddenly or even little by little which results in people comfort with their search engine and other products to decline. After enough time, people will be more willing and flexible to try something else and before you know it all of these people are now comfortable with another product.

The issue here is that all of the power lies in the hands of Google. They have to "screw up" in order for another company/product to have enough room to compete. Making a "better" product, while necessary, just isn't enough. Does that make Google a monopoly? I don't know. I do know that it is not standard competition in a free market though. The rules are different. Similar rules apply with Windows and IE.

RE: Time to break them up
By Motoman on 5/8/2009 2:48:33 PM , Rating: 3
Points taken, but I don't think Google "has" to screw up in order to let someone else take the limelight.

I don't think Yahoo necessarily screwed up when Google zoomed past them.

All it might take is one teenaged ZOMG u totly hv 2 chk this out is rox! for the next big thing to take off.

RE: Time to break them up
By borowki2 on 5/8/2009 2:56:59 PM , Rating: 3
Well, the same thing can be said for Internet Explorer or Windows Media Player. One can always choose to install Netscape or Real Player. The government's argument has always been that by merely making things easy for the user, it reduces the incentive for him to seek out alternatives and that constitutes an abuse of market dominance. Is MapQuest competing on an equal footing with Google Map? No. The link on Google's search page, which many users employ as their start page, clearly give them an advantage.

RE: Time to break them up
By Legolias24 on 5/8/2009 5:05:35 PM , Rating: 2
However, in the case of IE & WMP, they came bundled with with Windows (which you paid for). When you get an internet connection, Google is not automagically bundled with it.

I could be wrong, though, in my recollection of the IE and WMP issue, but I'm pretty sure it had to do with being bundled with the OS at a very fundamental level.

"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007
Related Articles

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki