Hey, Google, Microsoft payback is a bitch

What goes around comes around, and Microsoft proved the point by filing an antitrust complaint against Google. I'm not so much surprised by Microsoft's action but why it took so long. Google dogged Microsoft with European trustbusters for years, now it's tit-for-tat time.

Microsoft "decided to join a large and growing number of companies registering their concerns about the European search market," Brad Smith, general counsel, writes in a blog post today. "By the European Commission's own reckoning, Google has about 95 percent of the search market in Europe." Say, doesn't that figure sound familiar -- like Windows on x86-based PCs when U.S. trustbusters targeted Microsoft in the late 1990s?

In February 2009, I posted analysis: "Google's EU gambit is stupid," warning that the search giant's cooperation with European trustbusters against Microsoft would come back to bite its arse. The European Competition Commission was investigating Microsoft's bundling -- in legal parlance, tying -- Internet Explorer with Windows.


"Google is setting itself up for a big fall by gunning for Microsoft this way," I explained. "The search giant is engaging in competition by litigation with a governmental organization that has no legal or public mandate to reciprocate anything. In fact, Google is likely to be investigated by the European Commission some time in the near future. Google's search share, which is higher in many European countries than in the United States, is reason enough for the EC to open an antitrust investigation. It's not a matter of if but when."

That investigation did come. After months of preliminary review, the European Commission made it official on Nov. 30, 2010. Google's in the outhouse now, and in the way I predicted in February 2009: "I find it strange that Google wants to participate in a remedy process about tying...The arguments Google would make about bundling could be later used by the European Commission against the search giant. Apparently, somebody at Google believes participation is worth the risk."

So comes Microsoft's payback. "Google has engaged in a broadening pattern of walling off access to content and data that competitors need to provide search results to consumers and to attract advertisers," Smith accuses. His examples are very much about Google tying search to other products or services, preventing competitors access in the process. There is irony here since Microsoft faced similar accusations of blocking competitors, too, in U.S. and European antitrust cases.

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith

Regarding YouTube, Smith alleges that Google has put in place "a growing number of technical measures to restrict competing search engines from properly accessing it for their search results. Without proper access to YouTube, Bing and other search engines cannot stand with Google on an equal footing in returning search results with links to YouTube videos and that, of course, drives more users away from competitors and to Google."

It's a smart example. Google is the No. 1 search destination in most markets, while YouTube is the top video site/service. In the United States, YouTube would rank third, based on search share, if counted alongside Google and Bing. Microsoft essentially argues that Google has tied together the two services to control search access and to extend Google's monopoly from one market to another -- that's exactly the kind of behavior the EC would want to prevent and Microsoft should point out. U.S. trustbusters have called this kind of duopoly the "applications barrier to entry" that effectively shuts out competition, thus harming consumers.

Smith gives other examples, alleging that Microsoft can't offer a good YouTube experience on smartphones, because "Google has refused to allow Microsoft's new Windows Phones to access this YouTube metadata in the same way that Android phones and iPhones do." There's another tying accusation with punch. Google's mobile operating system is growing gangbusters -- 888.8 percent year over year globally in 2010, according to Gartner. IDC predicts that Android will have about 40 percent smartphone OS market share globally this year.

"Google has enabled its own Android phones to access YouTube so that users can search for video categories, find favorites, see ratings, and so forth in the rich user interfaces offered by those phones. It's done the same thing for the iPhones offered by Apple, which doesn't offer a competing search service," Smith writes. "As a result, Microsoft's YouTube 'app' on Windows Phones is basically just a browser displaying YouTube's mobile website, without the rich functionality offered on competing phones."

I'm surprised European trustbusters took so long to begin a formal Google investigation. In December 2007, I blogged: "The Google Monopoly begins," asserting that "Google is becoming the new Microsoft, only much worse." I re-articulated and expanded the reasons with February 2010 post "Google is a dangerous monopoly -- more than Microsoft ever was." The clincher: December 2010 post "I sold my soul to Google, can I get it back?"

Google has long used U.S. and European antitrust oversight or investigations to stick it to Microsoft. Another example: In 2007, Microsoft agreed to change how search works in Windows Vista, following a Google complaint to US trustbusters. Now it's Microsoft's turn at the bat.

"Having spent more than a decade wearing the shoe on the other foot with the European Commission, the filing of a formal antitrust complaint is not something we take lightly," Smith writes. "This is the first time Microsoft Corporation has ever taken this step."

Payback's a bitch, Google. Get used to it.

21 Responses to Hey, Google, Microsoft payback is a bitch

  1. 4rcane says:

    I wonder how long before they go after apple

    • rebradley says:

      Soon, Apples monopolistic practices make Google look like a virgin on their first date.

  2. Jonah says:

    why is it irony? isn't it Microsoft just holding other companies to the same standard they are forced to endure?

  3. cool_guy says:

    comment deleted by me

  4. cool_guy says:

    There is a difference between MS' way of achieving 95% market share and Google's!

    Google didn't force its search engine on to us. The users themselves "chose" Google over MS's search engines naturally. We have a choice, I had a choice and I chose Google over Yahoo!, Altavista, Metacrawler, the Ask thingie, Lycos and all of the MS's offerings....I chose Google and continue to choose Google even though MS's seems like it insists I use theirs. I still choose Google and this is simply because I trust Google's search results more over Bing's and yet, Google never ever brought me a pop up (on what product?) offering me to use their search engine.

    Can you say the same thing about MSIE?

    • SlapShot says:

      It's not that they got their 95 percent share, it's how they keep it. The EU will go after the latter

    • PC_Tool says:

      [i]The users themselves "chose" Google over MS's search engines naturally[/i]

      Firefox defaults to Google. No questions asked. IE, even being the ~horrifying, child-molesting, Root of All Evil~ that it is, prompts the user to make the decision during install.

      Firefox ain't the only one either...and it isn't just browsers.

      Please note: I am not saying this is a Good™ or Bad™ thing, merely pointing out that well...you're wrong. Sorry.

      • Bladeforce says:

        ie tries to default to bing even when you tell it the default is something else, it really is quite hilarious how microsoft still to this day push hypocrisy around the IT world. what next hobbled versions of...oh wait..they already do

      • Bladeforce says:

        i chose google or didnt you have the self control to choose for yourself tool?

      • PC_Tool says:


        You have zero recall, don't you? Can you even remember what you had for breakfast?

        I've told you before I use Google search..Google Mail..Firefox...Android...

        You know, just because I say "Firefox defaults to Google" doesn't mean I hate firefox or don't use google. I am merely stating a fact.

        Firefox defaults to Google...That is all.

        ...you should try doing that sometime instead of your constant barrage of stupid. (Yeah, that'll happen...)

    • evan2k says:

      ah yes..you could have gotten yourself one of the hundreds linux distributions, or a MAC...

  5. IT advisor says:

    Remember when Microsoft used to claim its products were cross-platform, but then release hobbled versions for the other platforms.

    eg, Windows Media Player and Internet Explorer were always hobbled on the Mac.

    Now YouTube doesn't work properly on Windows Phone 7.

  6. Holly267 says:

    I agree with cool_guy... we're "forced" to use MS, but we choose to use Google.

  7. psycros says:

    There are only two roads forward that don't lead to endless, profit-destroying courtroom wars: either everything becomes open to everyone, or we roll back fifteen years to nothing but walled gardens and closed ecosystems. I don't think anyone wants the latter, especially not Apple - at least not until Google starts selling music.

  8. Neoprimal says:

    Business is full of hypocrisy, it's not irony at all. Even if Google didn't team up against MS, this would have happened. Plain and simple, Google has goods that MS needs access to - had it been the other way around, I'm sure Google would be bitching. This is the world of business, period. As someone else has mentioned, MS apps on competitors devices aren't that 'feature rich' either (aka, are 'hobbled'). To this day there is no official Windows Live Messenger on Android....such is business.

    Honestly I wish they'd all just come together in an orgy of honorable business-ship and quit all this whining, pissing and moaning in court. They are competitors yes, but if they all cease the "it's mine, not yours!" behavior, it would 1. benefit consumers and 2. save them LOTS of money in court/lawyer costs.

    • Bladeforce says:

      big difference is that microsoft has been at the forefront of holding back technology for their own market share. they had the intel dispute that was ruled against them, netscape they offered to be a partnership in an illegal venture that netscape refused to be part of next minute microsoft used their market muscle to make sure web pages wouldnt open in netscape. when netscape disappeared microsoft didnt even bother to do any decent upgrades to ie because they had muscled out, illegally netscape. just a couple of examples before i even get onto office and windoze holding back technology..

  9. Aires says:

    "By the European Commission's own reckoning, Google has about 95 percent of the search market in Europe." Say, doesn't that figure sound familiar -- like Windows on x86-based PCs when U.S. trustbusters targeted Microsoft in the late 1990s?


  10. P4bl0 says:

    Hi Joe,
    Could you bet something like "I'll kiss Steve Ballmer's feet" to that Google will lose the antitrust investigation? (if it would be open, of course) something like I'll kiss Google founder's feet would be OK (you know, put your money(lips) where your...) ha,ha.
    PC_Tool to bladeforce: "I've told you before I use Google search...etc"

    Hard as hell it's to hide an elephant(read shill) behind a tree...


    • P4bl0 says:

      Just joking Joe of course.
      BTW: Get something working hard is very different that get it with malice/fraud(MS).

    • PC_Tool says:

      [i]PC_Tool to bladeforce: "I've told you before I use Google search...etc"

      Hard as hell it's to hide an elephant(read shill) behind a tree...[/i]


      Obsess much? I think you need another object for your affections...have you considered stalking celebrities, or are you just working your way up to it?

© 1998-2020 BetaNews, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy - Cookie Policy.