Mladen Antonov/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
By EDWARD WYATT
Published: January 3, 2013 26 Comments
WASHINGTON — The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday found that Google
had not violated antitrust or anticompetition statutes in the way it
structures its Web search application — handing a big victory to the
search giant in its ongoing dispute with regulators.
REACTIONS ON TWITTER
Related
- Comments from the F.T.C.'s Jon Leibowitz
-
U.S. Escalates Google Case by Hiring Noted Outside Lawyer (April 27, 2012)
-
Onetime Allies in Antitrust Part Ways Over Google (December 17, 2012)
Readers’ Comments
Share your thoughts.
But the commission found
that Google had misused its broad patents on cellphone technology, and
ordered Google to make that technology available to rivals.
Google’s competitors, including Microsoft, have pressed vigorously for
federal officials to bring an antitrust case involving its search
business. Last year, an F.T.C. staff report recommended that the
commission bring such a case.
The F.T.C. found that although Google sometimes favors its own products
when producing search results with its ubiquitous search engine, its
actions were “not undertaken without legitimate justification,” said Jon
Leibowitz, the F.T.C. chairman.
Google agreed, however, to take certain actions to address what Mr.
Leibowitz called “the most problematic business practices relating to
its search and search advertising business.”
The trade commission’s inquiry has been going on for at least a year and
a half. Google disclosed in June 2011 that it had received formal
notification from the commission that it was looking into Google’s
business practices.
Google has long defended its search business, saying that it offers
results that are most relevant to consumers and that the “competition is
just a click away.” It contends that users who believe a Google search
is not meeting their needs can easily move to another search engine,
like Microsoft’s Bing.
Google has also said that the barriers to entry into the search business
are so low that it cannot abuse its market power, even though it has
more than a 70 percent share of the search business in the United
States.
Companies that rely on Google to drive traffic to their sites have complained
that Google adjusts its search algorithm to favor its own growing
number of commerce sites — including shopping, local listings and
travel.
But the trade commission faced an uphill battle in proving malicious
intent — that Google changes its search algorithm to purposely harm
competitors and favor itself. Antitrust lawyers say anticompetitive
behavior cannot be proved simply by showing that a change in the
algorithm affects other Web sites and causes sites to show up lower in
results, even though studies have shown that users rarely look beyond
the first page of search results.
The commission was pressing to wrap up its case before Monday, when a
new commissioner will be sworn in, a development that could have
affected the result of the Google investigation. Joshua D. Wright, a
professor at George Mason University, was confirmed by the Senate this
week to take one of the two Republican spots on the five-member
commission. Mr. Wright had previously said he would recuse himself from
any Google matters for two years, because he has done work for or about
the company including co-authoring a paper arguing that Google has not violated any antitrust statutes.
Mr. Wright will replace J. Thomas Rosch, a commissioner since 2006. If
the Google case were not settled by Monday, the commission faced the
prospect that a vote on whether to charge Google would deadlock at 2-2.
The commission voted 4-1 to settle the patent charges, and voted 5-0 to
close its antitrust and competition investigation.
“The F.T.C.’s credibility is eroded when confidential details of
internal discussions are revealed to the media, as has continually been
the case in the investigation of Google,” Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of
Oregon, said in a Nov. 26 letter to Mr. Leibowitz, the commission
chairman. Mr. Wyden also said there was plenty of evidence that adequate
competition exists in the search business. He cited the recent
introduction of competitors like DuckDuckGo,
which has a no-tracking privacy policy inspired by some consumers’
complaints about the tracking of consumer behavior that Google and other
search engines perform.
“Compared to almost any other market in the history of antitrust
regulation, online search has effectively zero barriers to entry,” Mr.
Wyden said.
No comments:
Post a Comment