A daily dose of philosophical food for your noodle!		NoodleFood : RSS Feed | via E-mail | Recent Comments | Archives NoodleCast : M4A via iTunes (MP3) | via Feed Reader | via E-mail Diana Hsieh : Rationally Selfish | PhiloFiles | Explore Atlas Shrugged OList Mailing Lists | FIRM | FRO | Secular Government

Monday, September 22, 2008 Antitrust: Punishing Success By Diana Hsieh @ 5:12 PM Jason Crawford published an excellent letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal on the potential for an antitrust suit against Google: Microsoft's general counsel, Brad Smith, says that "if search is the gateway to the Internet . . . this deal [with Yahoo] will put Google in position to own that gateway and the information that flows through it" ("Top Lawyer Is Selected as U.S. Mulls Google Suit," Marketplace, Sept. 9). Why shouldn't they own it? They built it. Google is the most popular search engine because of the relevance and speed of its results; it is the dominant advertising platform because ads are more effective there than anywhere else. Google deserves its leading position and the rewards that go with it. This case, like every other major antitrust case from Standard Oil to Microsoft, aims to punish a winning company for the crime of winning. This is a grave injustice to Google and will only harm the industry in the long run. Why place the ideal of "competition" ahead of the economic productivity that competition is supposed to promote? It would be far more just, and better for the economy, to simply let the winners win. Jason Crawford Seattle Great letter, Jason! Labels: Activism, Business, Law Share |    E-mail Diana Hsieh     PermaLink ()    Comments (New Page)   Subscribe to NoodleFood Blog Posts via Feed Reader   via E-mail Subscribe to NoodleCast Podcasts M4A via iTunes (MP3)   via Feed Reader   via E-mail

Comments
	Monday, September 22, 2008 at 20:03:13 mst Comment ID: #1 Name: Jeff Montgomery URL: http://funwithgravity.blogspot.com That is a good letter. Very succinct, and it advances a point that has a good chance of being accepted by the general public.
	Monday, September 22, 2008 at 20:48:13 mst Comment ID: #2 Name: Damon E-mail: damon(at)damonpayne.com URL: http://www.damonpayne.com I wrote a short article on this topic as well: http://www.damonpayne.com/2008/09/09/BreakUpGoogle.aspx
	Tuesday, September 23, 2008 at 11:16:30 mst Comment ID: #3 Name: Peter de Laat I agree it's an good letter. But as a side note, I'd like to point out Google's own response when Microsoft did it's bid on Yahoo. Read the interview with google's ceo http://www.cnbc.com/id/24387350/site/14081545/page/2/.
	Tuesday, September 23, 2008 at 13:27:46 mst Comment ID: #4 Name: jonathan blaze E-mail: j(at)blaze.com Yeah, just look how great de-regulation worked on Wall Street *rolleyes*
	Tuesday, September 23, 2008 at 13:44:43 mst Comment ID: #5 Name: brian0918 E-mail: my handle, through gmail Jonathan: All you've shown is that politicians can co-opt a word for their own purposes, regardless of the word's actual meaning - in this case, "deregulation".
	Wednesday, September 24, 2008 at 17:05:59 mst Comment ID: #6 Name: Kevin E-mail: kmorrill(at)microsoft.com URL: http://www.netprofitmotive.com/ It is sad that Brad Smith has gone down this road. It's also sad that Eric Schmidt will now reap what he sowed as the former CEO of Novell advocating the original DOJ investigation into Microsoft. I hope critics of antitrust against Google will be just as outraged and critical of the on-going punishment perpetrated against Microsoft. As a result of the limitations placed by the DOJ, Microsoft has no power over OEMs to get them to build better out of box experiences for a PC. So for example, Microsoft is powerless to prevent OEMs from polluting new computers with useless software that makes your experience worse. Microsoft could also have done a much deaper integration of search into the operating system that makes it easier to use for customers, but avoids this out of fear of antitrust reprisal. It has also spent millions of dollars and tens of thousands of man hours documenting interoperability standards at no benefit to customers and great benefit to its competitors.
	Wednesday, September 24, 2008 at 18:40:55 mst Comment ID: #7 Name: Andrew Dalton E-mail: andrew.s.dalton(at)gmail.com URL: http://witchdoctorrepellent.blogspot.com Kevin: I remember reading about all the hoops that Microsoft now has to jump through, including modifications of software, just to comply with DOJ oversight. It cannot be possible to satisfy both the technical demands of a complex engineering project, and also the arbitrary demands of government lawyers backed by guns. It makes me wonder if much of people's frustration with Vista (pre-SP1, anyway) ought to be directed at the federal government.
Post Your Comment
Name or Handle: E-mail: URL:   Remember Me   Comment:   No HTML is allowed. URLs will be automatically converted into clickable links. Commenters are welcome to clearly state their own views, as well as to criticize opposing views and arguments. Unjust personal attacks are not welcome. The NoodleFood comments are not a general discussion board. Do not post random questions or comments, except on the designated "open threads" posted on Wednesdays and Sundays. To weed out spammers: 1 plus 4 equals 6020026836896839237