Despite Resistance From DOJ, Google Pressing New Antitrust Case Against Microsoft

from the relentless dept

Mon, Jun 11th 2007 9:44am — Joseph Weisenthal

By no means has Microsoft prevented Google from thriving, but that hasn't stopped Google from occasionally waving the antitrust stick in Microsoft's direction. Last year, the company complained that the searchbar in IE7 was anti-competitive because it defaulted to Microsoft's Live search, a pretty flimsy claim in its own right, but patently absurd in light of the fact that Google pays companies like Dell to establish itself as a default search engine. This weekend, the New York Times reported that Google has quietly filed an antitrust complaint against Microsoft pertaining to Vista and desktop search. Specifically, Google claims that Microsoft engineered Vista in such a way so as to render third-party desktop search offerings more difficult to use. This type of thing, Google claims, specifically violates Microsoft's settlement with the DOJ, which compels the company to make its operating systems hospitable to third-party applications. Where the story gets more interesting is that the top antitrust lawyer at the DOJ took the unusual step of sending a letter to various state prosecutors encouraging them not to take up Google's cause. Not only were they nonplussed by the letter, but there's a sense that the official may have some sort of conflict of interest, since he used to work at the law firm that defended Microsoft during its antitrust case. This, however, is not a black and white question, since he didn't actually work on the Microsoft case while at the firm. Furthermore, given the current administration's generally laissez-faire attitude towards antitrust issues, it's not surprising that the DOJ would be populated by lawyers sympathetic to Microsoft. Either way, it looks like more headaches for Microsoft, as the letter seems to have backfired, and a number of states seem set to take up Google's complaint.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

12 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

ReallyEvilCanine, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:02am

Come off it
There's a huge difference between Google paying Dell, one of many manufacturers out there, to make them the default search. MS on the other hand -- you know, the convicted monopolist -- not only forces their own unrelated search product onto the browser but reverts changed settings to that same default every so often.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:07am

Cant the google kids come up with something more innovative than an antitrust lawsuit to defend it's old product? Google's desktop search was nice when it came out... several years ago, but now it's time to see something new and creative from these google kids.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
reed, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:23am

It might have been different...
It might have been different is Microsoft actually had something real happen to them in the last case. Instead it was business as usual.

It would be like if OJ went out and killed another one of ex-lovers 'cause he got away with it the first time. This has been Microsoft's actions in many ways. They are still playing monopolist like they always have. Linux patent FUD? Vista cutting out security vendors?

There are literally hundreds of other examples of how MS has continued to play hardball even when they already totally dominate the desktop. What are we left with? A bloated crap-ass product we are all forced to upgrade too. Doesn't seem like everything is so great in MS land anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:33am
  
  Re: It might have been different...
  "Linux patent FUD?" and over the past years, what has actually happened with this... nothing but FUD.
  
  "Vista cutting out security vendors?" and if you change the kernel to make the OS much more secure, then you are making the OS much more secure instead of sitting on your but and whining about how your current software version is no longer needed. Heck, wagon wheels are not as popular today because the vehicle has changed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Reed, 11 Jun 2007 @ 12:07pm
    
    Re: Re: It might have been different...
    ""Vista cutting out security vendors?" and if you change the kernel to make the OS much more secure, then you are making the OS much more secure instead of sitting on your but and whining about how your current software version is no longer needed. Heck, wagon wheels are not as popular today because the vehicle has changed."
    
    What? MS made an insecure system to begin with so 3rd party vendors came up with solutions to the problem. MS then changes the way you access the kernel and doesn't share it with anyone they are not partnered with. They then extort extra money from all security vendors and at the same time bundle their own security software with the OS.
    
    It is the same old story, rather than allowing Vista to be modular so that vendors can easily make plugins they do just the opposite. They lock it up and hold the keys for a fee and then throw in their own crappy in-house version of all popular software.
    
    The problem is when you try to do it all you end up sucking at everything.
    
    Anti-competitive? Yes
    Monopolistic? Yes
    After all it's good old MS!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dave, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:35am

@anonymous
Can't those Microsoft stiffs come up with an innovative product rather than using anti-competitive means to stifle competition? Microsoft's applications were nice when they came out... many years ago, but now it's time to see something actually innovative from these Microsoft stiffs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
James, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:37am

As a developer...
... (and lover of Google for the most part, btw), i'd be VERY curious for them to explain themselves as to WHY they think Vista is unfriendly towards their desktop search product. I'm gonna call bullsh*t here.

Me doest think the queen protests too much.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FUG Buster, 11 Jun 2007 @ 10:52am

Google Jumping The Shark
Almost Every Time a company starts to spend too much time in court against Microsoft than just working hard to please their own customers and maybe Microsoft's to steal them they don't do well.

The court before innovation thing really helped Netscape didn't it?

For all the Microsoft haters... pay attention Google is getting big, wants to insert itself in everything. And seems to think any data should be its to give away including your personal info.

The enemy of Microsoft is not necessarily your friend..

BTW When I start IE 7 for the first time it asks if I want to change my default search provider. Sounds like Google needs more marketing and less attorneys.. What is Microsoft suppose send out invitations to use Google now too!!!

Time for Tort reform that punished companies for wasting the Justice Department's Time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Buzz, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:14am

The time has come...
Google just needs to give everyone what they have been wanting all along: a Google-based Linux distribution. Or heck, maybe it wouldn't even be Linux-based. Maybe they would write their own system altogether! However they do it, the time has come for Google to simply offer a new easy-to-use free OS. People would flock to it by the millions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DFAL, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:16am

MSN Search Losing Market Share
Despite Microsoft's anti-competitive advantages, MSN/Live has been losing market share.

I do not like Google at all, having had a few sites fall victim to Google's sandbox. Google's results have been dismal for 3 years now, particularly for newer websites. Microsoft's attempt to steer users to MSN/Live has been an abject failure. It's a non-issue, really.

As for Google's desktop search, how many people use that? Nobody I know does. It may be another non-issue that nobody cares about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danny, 11 Jun 2007 @ 11:46am

Silly and shortsighted
The first complaint was absolute nonsense. It is very easy to switch the default search in IE7 and it has never switched back to Live. Also the fact that they ask if you'd like to change it and that anyone can pay a manufacturer to change it makes it a non-starter. That makes me think the 2nd suit is out there just to annoy as well.

This stuff is awfully shortsighted on google's part since, given that their search dominance is still growing, there is a future in which someone is going to sue them claiming that putting a new app on the homepage or ranking their apps above a competitors in a search is similiar to services within MS own OS, defaulting to their stuff.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Norman619, 11 Jun 2007 @ 12:06pm

This is pure 1st class BS
How the hell is MS hurting Google? Symantec and the other crybaby vendors had a better agument and they too were full of BS. Google apps install just fine under Vista and run fine too. How is MS keeping them from competing? Google wants MS to make their applications more appealing to users. I fail to see how that is a MS job. If I were MS I'd push to let this case go forward then when Google is proven to be full of shit move to have Google pay for MS legal fees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]