Antitrust: Google Not Wrong, Microsoft Rattle
Microsoft is unhappy: the FTC and Google have finally reached an agreement for the giant lightweight, will not change much.
Google and the FTC have announced their agreement last night, and it may already seem like a victory for the Internet giant. The Federal Trade Commission, the trade in the United States regulatory body, has concluded its investigation of two years by a whitening of Google.
In final statement, the FTC estimated that Google has not overstepped its rights by rearranging the results of its search engine to put forward its own services. A discrimination which complains including Microsoft for a long time.
Non-trial with a view
This decision, according to the New York Times: the FTC does not prevent Google to promote its services, there is no reason that strengthens yet its dominance on the Internet. Damage, seems to judge the newspaper.
He recalled also that Google will not have to deal with costly trial that affected Microsoft in the 1990s. Enabling services such as Google in the technology sector. No US vs. Google, therefore.
Of course, Google has agreed to make some changes to its business practices. On research, but on the patent, also it should attempt to show white paw. But this apparent mark of good will may be the reason that prompted the FTC to whitewash the giant.
In all cases not judging this Politico article. Considering that one of the errors of Microsoft in the 1990s had been to ignore Washington, the political magazine reported during the investigation by the FTC, Google spent $ 25 million in lobbying in political circles of the U.S. capital.
Related to Politico’s reported, it has been able to interrogate the former head of the Office of Google in Washington, Alan Davidson, who believes that “it was a multi-year campaign which targeted this particular moment, as we knew that grow, the company would experience such problems. We had the opportunity to see those who have come before us, and we saw their errors.”
Google does not actually make the same mistakes. In the end, he still had to make one or two concessions to show its goodwill. It will no longer prevent its competitors from using patents Motorola Mobility, its subsidiary, which cover standard technologies. A legal provision that Google should already applied …
Other changes, whether imposed by agreement or voluntarily made by Google are the same level of evidence. Nothing upsets the practices of search engine, therefore, but enough for the FTC said in a press conference yesterday that “Google agrees to change its business practices.”
If there is an upset, it is obviously Microsoft. The editor of Redmond slams the FTC decision, reports The Verge. It is considered “low” and “unusual” by Microsoft. Like yesterday, the Vice President Dave Heiner who comes to the offensive.
The promise of Google not seek to ban a unit of U.S. territory in disputes relating to patents on technology standard, for example. Microsoft said to have made the same promise before.
And besides, the FTC has provided a document containing a long list of exceptions, adds Heiner. In the context of a negotiation license on patents, for example, Google should be able to use the threat of an injunction banning.
Besides the problem of Youtube on Windows Phone, very difficult to access by Microsoft, and totally ignored by the FTC. Now the editor of Redmond puts his hope in the European Commission, which is also investigating similar issues, finding that the agreement between Google and the FTC is “a missed opportunity.”
Microsoft is not alone in criticizing the agreement: Yelp also speaks through the voice of its P-dg Stoppelman, a “missed opportunity.” According to CNET reported, Yelp believes that it is the consumers who lose in the end.
Even one of the commissioners of the FTC ruled yesterday that the agreement reached could look like “special treatment” from the control of trade. For Thomas Rosch, whose remarks were reported by The Verge, Google’s competitors can benefit agreements as sweet, “would mean that Google has received preferential treatment in this investigation.”
- Editorial staff:
- Press contact:
- Advertising information: