You are here

Googleopoly

Why is Google Obstructing Justice in Mississippi? EC Pay Attention

Google’s recent bullying and intimidating behavior in Mississippi looks terrible and smells bad.

Consider for yourself if Google’s corporate behavior in Mississippi is how innocent people or a responsible corporation act, if they have: a clear conscience, done nothing wrong, or nothing to hide?

What is going on in Mississippi that warrants close outside attention?

Google has filed an highly-unusual, and hyper-aggressive lawsuit in federal court to try and quash a Mississippi Attorney General’s subpoena investigating Google’s alleged willful, continued, aiding and abetting of many criminal activities via advertising, given that it has found initial evidence to indicate that the criminal behavior that Google admitted to in a 2011 $500m DOJ Non-Prosecution Agreement may be continuing to this day.

EU’s Google Antitrust Problems are Not Going Away – My Daily Caller Op-ed

Please read my latest Daily Caller op-ed: “The European Commission’s Google Antitrust Problems are not Going Away” – here.

  • It is Part 30 of my Google Unaccountability research series.

***

Google Unaccountability Series

Part 0: Google's Poor & Defiant Settlement Record [5-1-12]

Let’s Play Pretend: a Satire of Google’s Second EU Search Remedy Proposal

For satire to work, one has to have something to work with. Well Google doesn’t disappoint!

Please don’t miss the grins and aha-s from this playful satire -- here.

Implications of EU Ruling Google Abused its Search Dominance – My Daily Caller Op-ed – Part 28 Google Unaccountability Series

Please see my latest Daily Caller Op-ed – “Implications of EU Ruling Google Abused its Search Dominance” -- here.

 

Google Unaccountability Series

Part 0: Google's Poor & Defiant Settlement Record [5-1-12]

EU-Google: Too Powerful to Prosecute? The Problems with Politically Enabling Google – Part 22 Google Unaccountability Series

The EU blinked. It's obvious the EU does not want a high-profile political confrontation with Google over a search monopoly abuse enforcement action.

Last May, when the Competition authorities announced they had a preliminary Statement of Objections for four monopoly abuses against Google, the EU competition authority trumpeted their preference for a settlement over enforcement action in this case, i.e. ruling Google a search monopoly guilty of monopoly abuse that warranted a material fine. In extending their public deadlines for Google three times, and then tentatively accepting the immaterial search concessions Google proposed, it is obvious the EU bent over backwards to avoid politically confronting Google. 

Q&A One Pager Debunking Net Neutrality Myths