Official Google Blog: Yahoo! and the future of the Internet

I’m glad someone said it, I’m just surprised it was Google.

The openness of the Internet is what made Google — and Yahoo! — possible. A good idea that users find useful spreads quickly. Businesses can be created around the idea. Users benefit from constant innovation. It’s what makes the Internet such an exciting place.So Microsoft’s hostile bid for Yahoo! raises troubling questions. This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another. It’s about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation.

Could Microsoft now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC? While the Internet rewards competitive innovation, Microsoft has frequently sought to establish proprietary monopolies — and then leverage its dominance into new, adjacent markets.

Could the acquisition of Yahoo! allow Microsoft — despite its legacy of serious legal and regulatory offenses — to extend unfair practices from browsers and operating systems to the Internet? In addition, Microsoft plus Yahoo! equals an overwhelming share of instant messaging and web email accounts. And between them, the two companies operate the two most heavily trafficked portals on the Internet. Could a combination of the two take advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors’ email, IM, and web-based services? Policymakers around the world need to ask these questions — and consumers deserve satisfying answers.

This hostile bid was announced on Friday, so there is plenty of time for these questions to be thoroughly addressed. We take Internet openness, choice and innovation seriously. They are the core of our culture. We believe that the interests of Internet users come first — and should come first — as the merits of this proposed acquisition are examined and alternatives explored.

#

About the Author, Dan Cameron:

I'm the owner and solution engineer at Sprout Venture, a web solutions company that specializes in web development including WordPress.

I started my first blog in 2003 and transitioned to WordPress in 2004. Since moving to WordPress I've written a few plugins and themes for public consumption. Lately I'm busy engineering/building/coding and have only been able to share a few code snippets.

If you're in need of some web development, web design or custom WordPress plugins and/or themes contact me, I'll be happy to discuss it with you.

Read More »

  • coyotebear
    Hmm... A blog post doesn't in anyway account for "millions of people," I'd say.
  • I frankly don't know if that's the official position of the company, but what said in Google blog is probably what millions of people think.
  • coyotebear
    I think it simply is immensely bad PR for Google to have said all that.

    Particularly when Yahoo has been bleeding for quite some time.

    So the criticisms Jared had ought to be considered in the context of an internet without Yahoo.
  • If you're / they're talking about the possibility of them leveraging the desktop OS market share to "unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors", that's utterly ridiculous.

    Number one: if they were going to do that, they could do it now with or without Yahoo - this deal has nothing whatsoever to do with that possibility.

    Number two: they haven't shown any signs of heading in that direction. As I mentioned above (and as other posts such as the TechCrunch one you shared earlier point out) MS has actually been leading the way in terms of openness online in this area recently.

    Like I said before, this doom and gloom scenario laid out by Google is insane on many levels. There's no evidence to suggest that what they say might happen, and even if the deal did go through, Google would still be in much more of a monopoly position than their competition.
  • how: "take advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors’"
  • I'm surprised too; surprised that a normally professional company like Google would post such incredible FUD.

    For one thing, I've heard a lot about how MS's "Live" system (although not many users like it) has the most open API of the big players involved, moreso than Google or Yahoo in regards to their common / competing features (calendar, contact lists, etc.) Until that changes, a whole bunch of the above is totally ridiculous.

    Secondly, and more importantly, there is absolutely zero evidence that MS is willing or even able to pull that kind of a move. Google is obviously more threatened by the combination of Y and MS as a competitor, but I still don't think MS+Y has a very good chance of unseating Google's top position in many areas.

    An argument could be made that the fundamental structure of the internet itself (as long as net neutrality is preserved) makes such a controlling monopoly impossible altogether.

    But even if you disagree with that, if you want to call out monopoly players in the internet domain, it would be extremely difficult to argue that anyone is closer to doing so than Google. Some would say they already have that kind of monopoly. While I wouldn't go that far, this kind of talk is certainly hypocritical from their position.

    Frankly, Google looses a lot of credibility in my eyes for resorting to this sort of mudslinging as an "official" position. Perhaps there will be a future correction to this blog post (like they've done before), admitting that the poster's wacky statements do not necessarily reflect those of the whole company.
blog comments powered by Disqus