Google Says Microsoft-Yahoo Move Threatens Internet Innovation

Written by Evan Schuman
February 3rd, 2008

Microsoft’s $42 billion bid to takeover Yahoo—still being considered by Yahoo’s board—would threaten the "underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation," a Google executive said in a Sunday blog posting.

"Could Microsoft now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC?" asked David Drummond, the Google senior VP for corporate development and the search engine firm’s chief legal offer. "While the Internet rewards competitive innovation, Microsoft has frequently sought to establish proprietary monopolies — and then leverage its dominance into new, adjacent markets."

Added Drummond: "Could the acquisition of Yahoo! allow Microsoft — despite its legacy of serious legal and regulatory offenses — to extend unfair practices from browsers and operating systems to the Internet? In addition, Microsoft plus Yahoo! equals an overwhelming share of instant messaging and web email accounts. And between them, the two companies operate the two most heavily trafficked portals on the Internet. Could a combination of the two take advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors’ email, IM, and web-based services?"

Drummond referred to the move as a "hostile bid," which is a premature characterization. Yahoo’s board hasn’t yet rejected the bid, meaning this move could easily become friendly. Even if the firms start negotiating, it would still be considered unless Yahoo’s board rejects the move and Microsoft proceeds anyway, appealing directly to Yahoo shareholders.

But there’s little question that a merger of Yahoo and Microsoft would shake up the world of Google, which has enjoyed Microsoft’s inability to move MSN beyond a weak third-place position. Microsoft’s aggressiveness coupled with Yahoo’s technology and Internet heritage (it’s search may be second to Google but its portal is second to none) could be a frightening scenario in Google Land.

There’s an excellent story in Sunday’s New York Times that tries to figure out Microsoft’s current Yahoo strategy given what it revealed in internal documents that Microsoft used in its lobbying against the Google-DoubleClick deal. An important read if you care about the Google-Yahoo space.


One Comment | Read Google Says Microsoft-Yahoo Move Threatens Internet Innovation

  1. Bill Says:

    I find it hypocritical for a company whose name is synonymous with Internet search to criticize the move by Microsoft. Isn’t moving into adjacencies exactly what Google has done with Google News, Mail, and office productivity apps to compete with MS Office?


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.