Before the concept was corrupted in the late 19th century, "monopoly" meant the exclusive right to sell a commodity, granted by the government. (See http://www.

Before the concept was corrupted in the late 19th century, "monopoly" meant the exclusive right to sell a commodity, granted by the government. (See http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=monopoly http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=monopoly) Monopolies of this kind are wrong; they fly in the face of the American ideal. But Google achieved most of its success by its own merits, without the intervention of government. I don't think that it's right to tar legitimate earned success under the same conceptual brush used to attack feudalism. Doing so confuses the issue so much that it's not possible to arrive at a sensible answer.