[Ed runs a Washington trade organization that is appealing the DOJ-Microsoft antitrust settlement as being insufficiently, ah, rigorous. See: http://www.ccianet.org/press/03/0505.php3 --Declan] --- To: Declan McCullagh <declan@private> Subject: Re: [Politech] Google's possible IPO draw cries of "monopoly!" [priv] From: "Ed J. Black" <EBlack@private> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 15:02:40 -0500 We know what real monopolies look like and its not Google. Having a competitive level playing field is very important and is a proper subject for public agencies -WHEN there is a monopoly AND WHEN it abuses its power AND when there is competitive harm. Large market share, especially when there are no substantial barriers to entry is not grounds for action. Why some so misunderstood the Microsoft case - it wasn't about being big, or even being a multi-monopolist, but about breaking the law, causing harm, and NOT competing on a level playing field. Success and growth are not punished by our legal system. That myth is perpetuated by those who want to distort reality to protect lawbreakers by trying to delegitimize the law. --- From: "Meeks, Brock (MSNBCi)" <Brock.Meeks@private> To: "'Declan McCullagh'" <declan@private> Subject: RE: [Politech] Google's possible IPO draw cries of "monopoly!" [priv] Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2003 07:52:14 -0800 Of course this claim of "monopoly" is rubbish. And in fact, there is nothing inherently wrong or illegal about a monopoly; it's only if a so-called "monopoly" uses its position to thwart competition and squash potential rivals that it begins to run afoul of the law. Case in point: Microsoft. Then we must look at whether the monopoly has any competition in its relevant market. I can name a half-dozen search engines off the top of my head and a few that do a BETTER job than Google. Google may the name recognition, but it's certainly not a monopoly. Privacy concerns: with such technologies one can never discount privacy concerns. There are many fighting the good fight for privacy and that should continue. I would argue that a company going public provides more opportunities for outside scrutiny than if the company were kept in private hands. _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Oct 28 2003 - 12:33:56 PST