Google currently holds just as dominant a position in the search engine market as Microsoft does in the desktop operating system marketplace.  Microsoft was accused of abusing their dominant position to help them gain market position in other areas, such as with their Internet Explorer web browser.  Google has faced similar accusations earlier this year, as they tried to promote their new Google+ service.

One man who doesn't think there are any comparisons however, is Robert Bork, the former federal judge who spent the late 1990's arguing that Microsoft should be split up due to anti-trust violations. Bork released a point-by-point defense of the claims that Google is abusing their search engine power at an event in Washington DC this week.

"None of the purported antitrust problems that Google's critics have raised indicates that Google is behaving anti-competitively," concludes the 29-page legal analysis (PDF). "Given the serious factual, logical, and economic flaws in the antitrust complaints about Google's practices, one can reasonably conclude only that Google's competitors are seeking to use antitrust law to protect their own market positions."

The paper comes at a time when the FTC is concluding their own antitrust inquiry into Google.  The agency has hired a former Justice Department litigator to participate, and has reportedly sent a subpoena to Apple asking for details about its mobile search deal.

Most of Bork's comments are aimed at the group, which argues that the government must act against Google to ensure fair competition in the search engine market.  Bork rightly argues that the Google search engine is dominant largely because it is a superior product.

Indeed, the paper doesn't look at all at whether Google is using its search dominance to gain the upper hand in other markets, such as the social networking market with G+. Nevertheless, the report will be a boost to Google in their attempts to ward off government involvement in their activities.

Post a Comment


Powered by