Google wriggles out of FTC search smackdown. Now to Europe!

Fight or flight time for commissioner Almunia


Analysis The dust has yet to settle on yesterday's ruling in which the US Federal Trade Commission cleared Google of biasing its search results to nobble its competitors. But rival Microsoft is already accusing the ad giant of failing to be a "responsible" leader and is claiming victory in the lengthy antitrust case.

Google may have reason to celebrate, however, given that the FTC was satisfied that Google's business tactics were not bad for competition but instead showed product "innovation" that apparently improved search for its users.

While the FTC statement conceded that the introduction of Universal Search as well as additional changes made to Google’s search algorithms "may have had the effect of harming individual competitors", it also argued that these could "be plausibly justified as innovations that improved Google’s product and the experience of its users."

Google's own chief legal officer David Drummond couldn't resist playing on the commission's wording by saying that his company would "head into 2013 excited about our ability to innovate for the benefit of users everywhere."

But significantly there remains a potentially big hurdle for Google in the form of the competition office of the European Commission, headed up by Joaquin Almunia, which has yet to issue its conclusions on whether the search giant's business practice has amounted to an "abuse of dominance".

Google's search engine has an incredibly strong grip on the market in Europe, with a more than 90 per cent share. Rivals have long complained that they feel flattened by the Larry Page-run monster truck.

UK-based price-comparison outfit Foundem filed its complaints to the EC and the US Federal Communications Commission in February 2010 when it argued that consumer choice was being eroded, that competition was suppressed and that innovation had - in its view - been stifled by Google.

Last month, the company penned a letter to the FTC anxiously urging it to reconsider "anticompetitive search manipulations" that have been claimed by Foudem, Microsoft, Expedia, Trip Advisor and others. The missive came after reports - we now know - confirmed that the commission chaired by exiting Jon Leibowitz would end its investigation with the outcome being favourable for Google on search.

On 31 December, Foundem co-founders Adam and Shivaun Raff said to the FTC that such a conclusion would prove to be "a catastrophic mistake".

The letter continued:

It is no accident that search manipulation was the issue that sparked the US and European investigations; its insidious, anticompetitive impact outweighs all of Google’s other anticompetitive practices by a considerable margin. While virtually undetectable to users, Google’s search manipulations lay waste to entire classes of competitors in every sector where Google chooses to deploy them.

The Raffs further claimed that Google was, in effect, a master at confusion, obfuscation and intimidation.

It's now clear that the FTC disagrees with those allegations.

And the spotlight inevitably turns to Almunia, who has suggested that he will require a more stringent set of agreements from Google than those set out by the FTC. Lobby group Fairsearch, which is backed by Microsoft and other complainants, argued, meanwhile, that the Stateside competition commission had jumped the gun with its conclusions. It said:

The FTC’s decision to close its investigation with only voluntary commitments from Google is disappointing and premature, coming just weeks before the company is expected to make a formal and detailed proposal to resolve the four abuses of dominance identified by the European Commission, first among them biased display of its own properties in search results.

The FTC’s settlement is by no means the last word in this case, leaving the FTC without a major role in the final resolution to the investigations of Google’s anti-competitive practices by state attorneys general and the European Commission. The FTC’s inaction on the core question of search bias will only embolden Google to act more aggressively to misuse its monopoly power to harm other innovators.

A defeated Microsoft grumbled in a blog post from deputy general counsel Dave Heiner that Google was failing to recognise its "responsibilities as an industry leader" following the FTC's decision not to trample over the company's alleged "search bias".

"That is certainly consistent with the lack of change we continue to witness as we and so many others experience ongoing harm to competition in the marketplace," he said.

But nerves appear to be jangled at Redmond, with Heiner expressing some anxiety about the EC's investigation of Google.

In Europe Vice President Almunia has made clear that he will close his investigation of Google only with a formal, binding order that addresses search bias and other issues. We remain hopeful that these agencies will stick to their established procedures, ensure transparency, and obtain the additional relief needed to address the serious competition law concerns that remain.

In mid-December, Google was told by Almunia's office that it must convince its rivals that it competes fairly in the web search market or else face sanctions for alleged "abuse of dominance".

Google was given a month to come up with a solution to complaints that it favours its own services over its competitors' products in web search results. Google could be fined $4bn - 10 per cent of its revenue - if no deal can be reached and it loses a subsequent legal battle with the European Commission. ®

Broader topics


Other stories you might like

  • Google has more reasons why it doesn't like antitrust law that affects Google
    It'll ruin Gmail, claims web ads giant

    Google has a fresh list of reasons why it opposes tech antitrust legislation making its way through Congress but, like others who've expressed discontent, the ad giant's complaints leave out mention of portions of the proposed law that address said gripes.

    The law bill in question is S.2992, the Senate version of the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA), which is closer than ever to getting votes in the House and Senate, which could see it advanced to President Biden's desk.

    AICOA prohibits tech companies above a certain size from favoring their own products and services over their competitors. It applies to businesses considered "critical trading partners," meaning the company controls access to a platform through which business users reach their customers. Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta in one way or another seemingly fall under the scope of this US legislation. 

    Continue reading
  • Makers of ad blockers and browser privacy extensions fear the end is near
    Overhaul of Chrome add-ons set for January, Google says it's for all our own good

    Special report Seven months from now, assuming all goes as planned, Google Chrome will drop support for its legacy extension platform, known as Manifest v2 (Mv2). This is significant if you use a browser extension to, for instance, filter out certain kinds of content and safeguard your privacy.

    Google's Chrome Web Store is supposed to stop accepting Mv2 extension submissions sometime this month. As of January 2023, Chrome will stop running extensions created using Mv2, with limited exceptions for enterprise versions of Chrome operating under corporate policy. And by June 2023, even enterprise versions of Chrome will prevent Mv2 extensions from running.

    The anticipated result will be fewer extensions and less innovation, according to several extension developers.

    Continue reading
  • I was fired for blowing the whistle on cult's status in Google unit, says contractor
    The internet giant, a doomsday religious sect, and a lawsuit in Silicon Valley

    A former Google video producer has sued the internet giant alleging he was unfairly fired for blowing the whistle on a religious sect that had all but taken over his business unit. 

    The lawsuit demands a jury trial and financial restitution for "religious discrimination, wrongful termination, retaliation and related causes of action." It alleges Peter Lubbers, director of the Google Developer Studio (GDS) film group in which 34-year-old plaintiff Kevin Lloyd worked, is not only a member of The Fellowship of Friends, the exec was influential in growing the studio into a team that, in essence, funneled money back to the fellowship.

    In his complaint [PDF], filed in a California Superior Court in Silicon Valley, Lloyd lays down a case that he was fired for expressing concerns over the fellowship's influence at Google, specifically in the GDS. When these concerns were reported to a manager, Lloyd was told to drop the issue or risk losing his job, it is claimed. 

    Continue reading
  • UK competition watchdog seeks to make mobile browsers, cloud gaming and payments more competitive
    Investigation could help end WebKit monoculture on iOS devices

    The United Kingdom's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) on Friday said it intends to launch an investigation of Apple's and Google's market power with respect to mobile browsers and cloud gaming, and to take enforcement action against Google for its app store payment practices.

    "When it comes to how people use mobile phones, Apple and Google hold all the cards," said Andrea Coscelli, Chief Executive of the CMA, in a statement. "As good as many of their services and products are, their strong grip on mobile ecosystems allows them to shut out competitors, holding back the British tech sector and limiting choice."

    The decision to open a formal investigation follows the CMA's year-long study of the mobile ecosystem. The competition watchdog's findings have been published in a report that concludes Apple and Google have a duopoly that limits competition.

    Continue reading
  • Google offers $118m to settle gender discrimination lawsuit
    Don't even think about putting LaMDA on the compensation committee

    Google has promised to cough up $118 million to settle a years-long gender-discrimination class-action lawsuit that alleged the internet giant unfairly pays men more than women.

    The case, launched in 2017, was led by three women, Kelly Ellis, Holly Pease, and Kelli Wisuri, who filed a complaint alleging the search giant hires women in lower-paying positions compared to men despite them having the same qualifications. Female staff are also less likely to get promoted, it was claimed.

    Gender discrimination also exists within the same job tier, too, the complaint stated. Google was accused of paying women less than their male counterparts despite them doing the same work. The lawsuit was later upgraded to a class-action status when a fourth woman, Heidi Lamar, joined as a plaintiff. The class is said to cover more than 15,000 people.

    Continue reading
  • Google recasts Anthos with hitch to AWS Outposts
    If at first you don't succeed, change names and try again

    Google Cloud's Anthos on-prem platform is getting a new home under the search giant’s recently announced Google Distributed Cloud (GDC) portfolio, where it will live on as a software-based competitor to AWS Outposts and Microsoft Azure Stack.

    Introduced last fall, GDC enables customers to deploy managed servers and software in private datacenters and at communication service provider or on the edge.

    Its latest update sees Google reposition Anthos on-prem, introduced back in 2020, as the bring-your-own-server edition of GDC. Using the service, customers can extend Google Cloud-style management and services to applications running on-prem.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022