Conflict of Interest

For those interested in powerful evidence that many parts of Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt's Senate antitrust testimony September 21st under oath were apparently false, deceptive or misleading, please don't miss Foundem's 29 minute annotated fact-checking video of Mr. Schmidt's testimony.

• Foundem, a British product search competitor that has filed an antitrust suit against Google in the EU, has both the expertise and detailed-knowledge-base to fact-check and challenge Google's apparently extensive prevarication before the Senate.
• Using Mr. Schmidt's own responses to questions under oath, Foundem repeatedly provides evidence that Google apparently provided false, deceptive or misleading answers to questions about potential illegal anti-competitive behavior by Google.
• The video is must viewing for investigators of Google's antitrust alleged violations at the EU, the FTC, the DOJ, Korea, the Attorneys General of at least Texas, California, and New York; as well as the members and staff of the Senate and House Antitrust subcommittees responsible for overseeing the enforcement of antitrust laws.

In a nutshell, the video shows how Mr. Schmidt's responses to several questions about whether Google biases its search results for Google's benefit apparently are untrue or deceptive.

It also provides strong evidence supporting the conclusions of Subcommittee Ranking Member, Senator Mike Lee that:

How could Google fail to meet the security needs of the City of Los Angeles in its trophy government cloud contract?

Learn why in my Forbes Tech Capitalist post here, entitled "Google Too Fast and Loose for LAPD."

A Google engineer's rant about how Google does not "get" platforms creates the opportunity to learn why Google does not aspire to be a platform like its competitors do.

• See my Forbes Tech Capitalist post here: "Why Google's not a Platform."

Google's 3Q11 earnings call and release provided lots of new and relevant evidence to the many antitrust investigations of Google going on around the world.

• See my Forbes Tech Capitalist post here that explains the four big antitrust takeaways from the Google earnings call.

Brandi Sparkles, Google's satirical spokesperson, returns for a press conference to explain Google's new Trusted Stores Badge.

• See my Forbes Tech Capitalist post here. Enjoy!

Much of Google's claimed innovation actually depends upon anti-competitive infringement of others property and privacy.

• See my Forbes Tech Capitalist post: Google's "Infringenovation" Secrets here.

See my Forbes Tech Capitalist blog on Google's disingenuous free market charm offensive at the Heritage Foundation today -- here.

This week's C-Span Communicators show covers the Google Antitrust hearing. See video here.

I was interviewed for fifteen minutes from the Google critic perspective and David Balto was interviewed for fifteen minutes from the Google proponent perspective.

• An interesting contrast one can imagine.

"The Communicators" airs on Saturday at 6:30 ET and on Monday at 8am and 8pm on C-Span2.

My latest Forbes blog: "Google's Bait and Switch Deception Exposed at Hearing" is here.

It describes the overarching and recurring theme of yesterday's Senate Antitrust hearing on Google, that Google built the trust of users and content owners with the bait of representations that Google Search is unbiased and only focused on the user, then once they became dominant, Google pulled the switch, and deceptively changed their business model to favor their own Google content over competitors' content, all while continuing to maintain that their search engine is still unbiased.

See my Forbes post "Google 21st Century Robber Baron" which briefly tells the story of Google's Robber Baron rap sheet, in advance of Google's Wednesday Senate antitrust hearing.

• The post is documented with 79 links to the supporting evidence.

The post also explains why Google's Board of Directors have been AWOL while all this scofflaw behavior has been going on.