Microsoft's first antitrust target: Google

How the tables have turned. Microsoft, a company that is no stranger to regulator scrutiny, is planning to file an antitrust complaint against Google in Brussels today, the New York Times reports.

The move will be Microsoft’s first antitrust complaint against another company, which makes it more significant than a typical antitrust cry. Simply put, it’s a sign of desperation. The antitrust complaint tells us that Microsoft can no longer compete with Google directly, especially when it comes to Google’s key search technology and that it has no recourse but to try to slow down Google’s progress through other means.

Why Europe? According to the NYT, Microsoft is hoping that European officials, who have already received complaints against Google from smaller companies, will impose limits on Google. And of course, Microsoft is also hoping that US officials take the hint.

Microsoft and other companies claim that Google has undermined its competition when it comes to search, its Android mobile software, and online advertising. In particular, Microsoft says that Google prevents other search engines from fully indexing information from its services like YouTube. Microsoft’s Bing search engine, which has slowly eked out a small amount of search market share, is Google’s only big search competitor at the moment (Yahoo is now powered by Bing as well).

Microsoft’s complaint will likely have more weight in Europe, where Google’s search engine is even more dominant than it is in the US (with over 90 percent market share in most EU countries, compared to 65 percent in the US).

The company also says that Google is holding tight technical information that would offer a better YouTube experience for its Windows Phone 7 platform. Microsoft says that both Android and Apple’s iPhone OS support that technical information in their YouTube applications. Google has also released an updated mobile website for YouTube that would work across all mobile browsers, but Microsoft clearly doesn’t find that an adequate solution. (Personally, I find YouTube’s new mobile site far more usable than the Android or iPhone apps.)

Microsoft also takes issue with the way Google handles its ad contracts. Google keeps ad buyers from using third-party apps that compare ad pricing results and allow them to easily switch between ad platforms.

It’s worth noting here that Microsoft would likely be making the same decisions Google is now if their places were switched — and if Microsoft hadn’t already faced major scrutiny for its competitive tactics in the 1990s. In 2001, Microsoft entered into a settlement with US regulators that forced it to tone down its previous bully-like tendencies. The company has also faced fines and other rulings from European regulators.

Microsoft still needs to prove to European regulators that Google is harming consumers with its market advantages. That’s tough to show for search engines, according to antitrust expert Herbert Hovenkamp, because consumers can easily switch to another one.

  • keeponrolling

    a totally biased and one sided article. Journalism has become a joke these days.

  • http://www.devindra.org Devindra Hardawar

    I don't think you know what bias means.

  • http://www.devindra.org Devindra Hardawar

    I don't think you know what bias means.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YZRJA4KUI2DOTDZOXE5BTMMJVE Cpke Cats

    “Google has also released an updated mobile website for YouTube that would work across all mobile browsers, but Microsoft clearly doesn’t find that an adequate solution. (Personally, I find YouTube’s new mobile site far more usable than the Android or iPhone apps.)”Maybe you do, but that's totally missing the point. The point is that Microsoft's app does not have access to Youtube. What you like or dislike has nothing to do with it. Also, you claim that MS has complained because it cannot compete with Google directly. Does that mean that all of those complaints against MS were kind of baseless and meant to slow down MS as well? I agree with the previous comment. This was a pretty biased view. (And, yes, I know what “bias” means.)

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YZRJA4KUI2DOTDZOXE5BTMMJVE Cpke Cats

    “Google has also released an updated mobile website for YouTube that would work across all mobile browsers, but Microsoft clearly doesn’t find that an adequate solution. (Personally, I find YouTube’s new mobile site far more usable than the Android or iPhone apps.)”Maybe you do, but that's totally missing the point. The point is that Microsoft's app does not have access to Youtube. What you like or dislike has nothing to do with it. Also, you claim that MS has complained because it cannot compete with Google directly. Does that mean that all of those complaints against MS were kind of baseless and meant to slow down MS as well? I agree with the previous comment. This was a pretty biased view. (And, yes, I know what “bias” means.)

  • http://www.devindra.org Devindra Hardawar

    Yes, that's why I said that as a personal aside. It's a weird complaint for Microsoft to make when even the iPhone YouTube app is far behind in terms of features. I also don't understand your second point at all. The significance of this complaint is that it's Microsoft's first — the company has *never* done this before because it has dominated its competitors in other ways. That it's choosing to do so against Google now is definitely a sign of weakness.

  • http://www.devindra.org Devindra Hardawar

    Yes, that's why I said that as a personal aside. It's a weird complaint for Microsoft to make when even the iPhone YouTube app is far behind in terms of features. I also don't understand your second point at all. The significance of this complaint is that it's Microsoft's first — the company has *never* done this before because it has dominated its competitors in other ways. That it's choosing to do so against Google now is definitely a sign of weakness.

  • http://twitter.com/rangleme Randy Angle

    I'm pretty sure that Microsoft is just trying to even the field of competitiveness – you can't be competitive in an market where nobody else is getting slapped for the same types of things that you've been sanctioned for. Everyone needs the same impositions and rules to play by. Unfairly letting Google or Apple get away with breaking the rules, but limiting Microsoft can hardly be considered fair. Everyday I see Google and Apple get away with things that Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony all can not do (ESRB ratings, SEO, ads, privacy,,,)

  • The Werewolf

    Allow me to illustrate:”It’s worth noting here that Microsoft would likely be making the same decisions Google is now if their places were switched — and if Microsoft hadn’t already faced major scrutiny for its competitive tactics in the 1990s. .”This could have been written in a far more neutral way – and makes a predictive speculation about CURRENT management based on events that happened two decades ago, that aren't actually the same as this.The entire article could just as easily have been framed as “Google has become the new Microsoft” and showed that as companies get big and gain majority marketshares, they try to control their market (a similar article on Apple would be good here too), but you chose to frame this as Microsoft being hypocritical, thus diminishing the seriousness of the actual problem.That smacks of bias.

blog comments powered by Disqus