2 ms·
That memo and others from 2009 and 2011, the DOJ argued, made it clear that Google knew it needed "to be sensitive about antitrust considerations" and allegedly
by adolph 3y ago
That memo and others from 2009 and 2011, the DOJ argued, made it clear that Google knew it needed "to be sensitive about antitrust considerations" and allegedly worked to hide any sketchy-sounding activity that could trigger antitrust scrutiny.
It's kind of weird that the price of being successful is getting sued for monopolistic behavior. If Google had gone the way of Yahoo!, no lawsuit. If you think your company will make it big, then you have to be conscious about how lawyers will interpret your words many years after the fact.
- hotstickyballs 3y agoBeing successful is ok. Exploiting your success to prevent others from being successful is not
- adolph 3y ago> Being successful is ok. Exploiting your success to prevent others from being successful is not Any entity builds on previous successes to continue existing. Given that exclusivity agreements exist, how can a company be both successful and not monopolistic? It doesn't seem fair to say "lets look at what you did before you were successful, which was legal at the time, but becomes illegal if you are too good at it."
- gustavus 3y agoI don't think the problem is they were successful, I think the problem is more that they are using their success to effectively lock down the entire internet until only their approved platforms are allowed.
- adolph 3y agoTo what does the comment refer? Last I checked, Google has not "effectively lock[ed] down the entire internet until only their approved platforms are allowed."