<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in On Google-Yahoo! as an Antitrust Problem</title><link>http://tlf.disqus.com/</link><description>The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.</description><atom:link href="https://tlf.disqus.com/on_google_yahoo_as_an_antitrust_problem/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:12:28 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: On Google-Yahoo! as an Antitrust Problem</title><link>https://techliberation.com/2008/07/16/on-google-yahoo-as-an-antitrust-problem/#comment-1454940</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Jim,&lt;br&gt;Sorry I haven't had a chance before now to comment on your friendly difference of opinion on the relevant market in the Goohoo antitrust matter... &lt;br&gt;let me first agree with you that it is almost always best to let technologies and markets sort this out. Where we disagree is that Google is an outlier deserving antitrust scrutiny. &lt;br&gt;You were not entirely fair in your assessment of my definition of the relevant market as search for the Goohoo DOJ investigation. If you reread my piece I referenced that the FTC had concluded that search was a separate market from their in-depth review of Google-DoubleClick. I am far from out there when I justify my position based on what the FTC, an antitrust expert agency, and based on how Google markets itself. Those are two pretty relevant and strong facts supporting my conclusion. You may ultimately be right or I may be but one thing I think is clear -- the assessment that search is the relevant market is not just my view -- it  is the FTC's as well. I am not out on the fringes on  this one. &lt;br&gt;that said, I am always glad to provide entertainment to you in my quirky, over-the-top, and gadflyesque manner... &lt;br&gt;By the way, J. Edgar Google was the focus on my testimony today before Markey's House Internet hearing on Internet privacy...&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.precursorblog.com/content/my-house-testimony-internet-privacy-before-chairman-markeys-internet-subcommittee" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.precursorblog.com/content/my-house-testimony-internet-privacy-before-chairman-markeys-internet-subcommittee"&gt;http://www.precursorblog.co...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;Scott Cleland, Precursor/&lt;a href="http://NetCompetition.org" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="NetCompetition.org"&gt;NetCompetition.org&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Scott Cleland</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:12:28 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: On Google-Yahoo! as an Antitrust Problem</title><link>https://techliberation.com/2008/07/16/on-google-yahoo-as-an-antitrust-problem/#comment-1454942</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Don--Microsoft is already attempting to buy its way into the market (this is how the Live Search Cash Back program works).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wouldn't it be amusing if Google turned around and accused Microsoft of predatory pricing?  As you describe it, Microsoft would technically be diverting profits from its software monopoly to offer advertisers "below market" rates.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As Declan posted yesterday, antitrust can be molded to suit just about any purpose...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">DB</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:42:56 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: On Google-Yahoo! as an Antitrust Problem</title><link>https://techliberation.com/2008/07/16/on-google-yahoo-as-an-antitrust-problem/#comment-1454941</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Even if it can't build or buy a better search engine, MSFT can still buy its way into the online ad market in a way that benefits webmasters and advertisers -- by giving webmasters lucrative partner deals that Google won't do, and giving advertisers better rates and/or tools than Google will.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Or it can buy its way into the market the cheap way, by lobbying.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Don Marti</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 15:50:52 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>