By KELVIN DAVIS
(Kelvin Davis is the director or Greymouse, a cloud service-provider that supplies high quality, time-bound and cost-efficient services through its own facility in Fiji.)
Over the past few months, Google has been in the news rather a lot and having been once again accused of abusing its desktop dominance, Google has had a coalition of companies filing antitrust suits against its behavior in the mobile market. Refer to this link for more http://tinyurl.com/crn-microsoft-new-antitrust.
The Accusers
Actually filing this new complaint against Google are old European Union foes Microsoft and Nokia including Oracle plus a host of other travel booking sites.
What Is Google Being Accused Of?
Amidst existing European Union antitrust law suits inquiry into Google’s web search practices, its latest complaint accuses it of:
• Using it’s Android mobile system to deceive its partners
• Monopolizing the mobile market place
• Controlling consumer data
Google’s settlement with Federal Trade Commission
Much to the annoyance of Microsoft and Yahoo, the Federal Trade Commission had voted not to take action against Google when it came to the issue of search result manipulation, even with the existence of some evidence that suggested that Google did in fact use its search engine to push competitors out of the game. Google however then announced that it had reached a settlement by agreeing to:
• Eliminate restrictions to the Ad Words platform, which is their online advertising feature.
• To stop using the competitor content in specialized searches without approval.
What Does This Mean for the Consumers?
So what does this all mean for the consumers and users? Well, not really too much because:
• Google’s services will probably become a bit less useful, with companies like Yelp, TripAdvisor and Exoedia expected to pull out the opt-card.
• More smart phones and tablets will be seen that include technology controlled by Google (though many of us likely won’t even know this).
Monopolization Enforcement
Ever since the watershed Microsoft decision over a decade ago, so much has changed in the monopolization law landscape. Successful firms such as Google will be more likely to especially remain problematic targets because the market within which it competes in is characterized by:
• Innovation
• Very rapid technological changes
• A strong reliance on intellectual property rights.
Are these Law Suits against Google Effective Enough?
Given the fact that Google has exploited every delay to further entrench, extend and escalate it’s anti-competitive activities, Google’s ‘tap on the wrist” reprimand was actually nothing more than the cost of doing business.
European Union Competition Commissioner Joaquinn Almunia, however, has said that the EUC is very serious about Google’s abuse of its dominant position in the mobile market. Refer to this link for more http://tinyurl.com/insidegoogle-antitrust-google
Does the EU really hold all the Aces?
Unlike the Federal Trade Commission, the EUC does not have to make its case in court because it can simply impose the fine. Yet, one actually wonders weather the EUC actually will have an effective final say on this matter because:
• The antitrust laws are different in Europe therefore the settlement may play out differently.
• Google’s dominance in search is even greater in Europe at 90% of the market than the 70% share it commands in the US.
The Pressure Needs to be Kept On
Given its record of having violated consensual agreements and broken its promises, why would anyone believe that Google would be so willing to “roll over and play nice”. Consumer Watchdog has been pushing the Federal Trade Commission for more meaningful action ever since the last month when the antitrust probe began.
Without due continuous pressure, competitors and further down the line, consumers will always be the one losing because obviously this is a much bigger deal for Google as:
• It managed to effectively avoid an antitrust lawsuit
• The Federal Trade Commission was able to say that it did do something to knock Google’s dominance down an insignificant notch. But could not define exactly what???
So, the questions are
1. Can the laws keep up with technology advanced companies?
2. Just who exactly is fooling who???