Google questions Microsoft's bid for Yahoo!

It shouldn't come as a surprise to readers that the folks over at Google might not be totally stoked on the potential merger of Microsoft and Yahoo!. If you weren't sure where the company stood on the issue, you can now get clued in thanks to a post on the official Google Blog earlier today. David Drummond, senior VP of corporate development (and the company's chief legal officer) says that he worries the acquisition of the internet portal by a company that has "frequently sought to establish proprietary monopolies" could "extend unfair practices from browsers and operating systems to the internet." His concern centers around the possibility that the combination of the two monoliths could "unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors' email, IM, and web-based services." Sure, Google has more than a little stake in seeing fair play on the net (gotta keep those ad revenues up), but this is serious food for thought nonetheless.

Update: It looks like the war of words is really starting to heat up. Brad Smith, general counsel for Microsoft, has issued his own little statement here, telling us that Google holds far more marketshare when it comes to internet searching than a combined Microsoft and Yahoo! possibly could, and then going on to explain that the Redmond giant is "committed to openness, innovation, and the protection of privacy." Uh, whatever you say Brad.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

[chris @ Feb 3rd 2008 7:51PM]

i think the yahosoft merger would be good because it would really force google to step up which i would like to see happen.

[mr friggles @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:11PM]

I HATE GOOGLE AND MICROSOFT EQUALLY!

Any chance maybe one will shoot the other's top intern, and that starts off a bloody vendetta war where EVERYONE dies (employees, friends, fam, customers) and it ends with both top execs having some big show down in a server room, but the smoke from one of their gun nozzle's sets off the sprinkler system, electrocuting them both?

[John @ Feb 3rd 2008 7:57PM]

I stopped caring about Google's complaints after that bullshit about how Microsoft shouldn't be allowed to include a desktop search feature because that unfairly competed with Google's product.

[Jared @ Feb 4th 2008 1:16AM]

I'm just glad Google is looking out for my best interest and not their bottom line :)

[SteveS @ Feb 3rd 2008 7:58PM]

Just when you thought Google was everything, they have found a new role: CB'er.

[Ellianth @ Feb 4th 2008 8:25AM]

CB'er = c*ck blocker?

Spell it out, i'm slow.

[superted @ Feb 3rd 2008 7:58PM]

a google competitor... i say, bring it on.

[Kriston @ Feb 3rd 2008 7:58PM]

It's desperately natural for one hedgemony to dislike another.
It's embarrassing that Google, though, feels the need to comment.
After all, if they indeed have the better product, then the need to comment on said merger should be superfluous.

What does Google have to fear?
I mean, they're Google, aren't they? The company that can do no wrong?

[Intrepid @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:01PM]

I agree. Google cried because it meant there was no need for Google's shitty product, as Microsoft had created a better one.

[Mark L. @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:03PM]

If Microsoft becomes a monopoly after this merger than that's only because Google hasn't been competing and hasn't done anything amazing. Just look at Ask.com, I wish Google had a sidebar like that.

[Neil @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:06PM]

Google's bitching sounds pretty stupid to me. Though why MS would want to lockup so much of its money in Yahoo is beyond me and the fact that they would almost certainly have to take out a giant loan or clean out their own cash reserves to buy Yahoo seems like the wrong option for Microsoft to take in its fight for search and email services.

[Mike10010100 @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:06PM]

Forget Skynet.

Hello Microsoft.

[Drew @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:07PM]

Go MicroHoo!

[Chebwa @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:07PM]

"limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors' email, IM, and web-based services"

Microsoft has their own search engine, e-mail, and messaging program now. If they're not "BLOCKING" Google now, why would they start?

Crybabies.

[Ty @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:08PM]

Step up and do what?

[shiftyeyedgoat @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:08PM]

I personally would like to see "Microyahoo" as the acquisition trade name.

[Odd TSi @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:08PM]

I guess it doesn't take a genius to figure out where Mr. Topolsky stands on this issue. Bias much?

[illutionz @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:14PM]

"Microsoft is committed to openness, innovation, and the protection of privacy on the Internet. We believe that the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! will advance these goals."

ORLY!~!!!!!!
When Micro$oft is "commited to openness, innovation, and protection of privacy", the Sun will rise from the WEST

[Babbling Blackbird @ Feb 4th 2008 4:31AM]

Sun Microsystem actually rose from the west...

[Kevo @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:16PM]

Yeah Microo!soft ....Nah, I don't really care.

[Jim @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:21PM]

"and then going on to explain that the Redmond giant is "committed to openness, innovation, and the protection of privacy." Uh, whatever you say Brad"

WTF?

And in other news Engadget launch their latest column "The Microsoft Rant".
If Microsoft aren't open, then Apple is China!

[illutionz @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:22PM]

At least Apple is a "china" (as you mentioned it) that still provide a stylish product nonetheless...
A Micro$oft "china" is bad because not only the content SUCKS but the design SUCKS too
gg

[Miguel @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:23PM]

"Uh, whatever you say Brad."

This was completely uncalled for. Microsoft's info-gathering services (the "customer experience improvement program"s) are completely optional, and assured as anonymous usage data; any thing in violation of said privacy protection is a violation of the law. Microsoft didn't cave to China's assault on freedom; Google did. Microsoft and Yahoo! have been able to share IM networks for what, 2 years prior to this offer? Yeah, huge sign that Microsoft is against interoperability.

And, as Mr. Smith points out, Google's marketshare in Internet revenue and search services is above and beyond Microsoft and Yahoo!'s combined. They can stop their bitching right about now.

Microsoft+Yahoo!=

[illutionz @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:26PM]

Micro$oft and Yahoo! IM service are interoperable due to the fact that M$ tried to purchase Yahoo previously but was rejected by the higher ups of yahoo since they thought that their "new" strategy will work out... however after 1 year, the strategy doesn't give them anything and now Microsoft is launching another bid to yahoo except this time it's a hostile bid...

[Blaktornado @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:30PM]

If this happens, Google will team up with Apple and thus consumers will switch from Windows to Mac to use Google, and the computer market share will become 33.333% each for Windows, Mac and [Linux]. Wouldn't that be such a peaceful day? No-one could argue superiority with actual backing!

[Pro7 @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:40PM]

Do you care about your privacy?

Does Google share your opinion?


watch this:
http://www.masterplanthemovie.com/

[Andrew @ Feb 4th 2008 12:27AM]

I know you got rated down, but Google and Microsoft have this e-mail program available to universities if they wish to participate. Basically Google or Microsoft will handle the email for students and they offer no ads during your stay at the university, but when you leave you get to keep your email which is a huge plus but they support it with ads when you are no longer enrolled.

The problem: While they both have their downfalls, Google, once your email hits their servers takes almost full control of it. They could do anything they want with it and there is nothing you can do. Microsoft on the other hand takes a much more standoffish approach. They don't claim your email as theirs and have limits on what they do with it. This is very important for personal communications and privacy.

Microsoft may not be perfect on privacy, but Google is far from a champion too.

[Wifiguy @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:42PM]

What's with all the Microsoft Fanboys?!?! Microsoft complained about Google having bought Doubleclick while they enjoy 90 percent market share on desktops. Now they are using there muscle to buy a company against it's will. And they think Yahoo folks are just going to just be submissive young children and follow Ballmaer and crew? PC culture and internet culture are very different. I see alot of the best Yahoo folks going to Google.

[Olu O @ Feb 4th 2008 2:50AM]

"buy a company against its will"????

I'm not sure if you know anything about business practices, but Microsoft offered yahoo an OFFER to buy it. Im not sure what that means to you but to me, Yahoo can clearly tell Microsoft to fuck off and tell them that they're not interested, as they've done before in the past. I'm pretty sure that's not buying a company against they're will.

Just my $0.02.

[Chris @ Feb 4th 2008 11:20AM]

It's not Microsoft's fault that it has 90% share in desktops. Hell, they financed Apple for years just to make sure that it didn't reach 100%.

[wifiguy @ Feb 4th 2008 1:11PM]

Yahoo shareholders will take the money and run, Yahoo brass have a responsibility to shareholders so your option doesn't fly bud.

[Abuzar @ Feb 4th 2008 9:43PM]

Then it's not against Yahoo!'s will is it? The shareholders are the true owners of the company. If they decide to sell then it's not a hostile takeover. Dumbass.

[wifiguy @ Feb 4th 2008 11:00PM]

What's with the name calling low life. Jerry Yang and company did not want to sell to Microsoft but will be out voted because shareholders will want the quick buck. Not exactly Yang's vision.

[Abuzar @ Feb 5th 2008 6:53PM]

Well you can't call other people bud either. If that guy ain't your buddy, you DONT call him bud. That just doesn't fly.

That's almost as bad as me calling you as dumbass.

[wifiguy @ Feb 5th 2008 7:37PM]

Hey bud I don't know where you come from but where I'm from bud is a name of mutual respect. Anyways, let's stick to the issues shall we? Microsoft's bid is against the will of yahoo brass, but will fly because shareholders don't care about Yahoo's legacy all they care about is the quick buck.

[Abuzar @ Feb 5th 2008 8:33PM]

Dane cook. It was a joke from Dane Cook. lol

What I'm trying to say is, so what if it doesn't flow with Yahoo!'s brass, if the true owners, the share holders, agree with it then it is going by Yahoo!'s wishes. They aren't being forced to sell.

I guess the Yahoo! employees might be forced to work for a merged company, but they are just employees, not owners.

[wifiguy @ Feb 5th 2008 8:47PM]

The real talent at yahoo will go to Google, there no sellouts.

[wifiguy @ Feb 5th 2008 9:35PM]

The real talent at yahoo will go to Google, there no sellouts.

[Scott @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:51PM]

Where is this better product you speak of?

[Scott @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:51PM]

"Microsoft and Yahoo! have been able to share IM networks for what, 2 years prior to this offer? Yeah, huge sign that Microsoft is against interoperability."

Wow, you just made Google's point and you don't even know it!

Sharing between 2 proprietary networks isn't anywhere as good as the approach Google took with GTalk, that is basically Jabber and is compatible with any Jabber network.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Talk#Interoperability

[Dragod @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:52PM]

Google is complaining about a company having too much share in a market? Seriously? Google seems to have a foothold in every market, or is planning to. Some are much larger than others, obviously.

[Scott @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:52PM]

Maybe it's more Microsoft astroturfing. MS is notorious for these campaigns.
http://timlambert.org/2003/11/tcs/

[I.E @ Feb 3rd 2008 8:57PM]

From WSJ: Google CEO Eric Schmidt offered Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang help in any effort to thwart Microsoft's unsolicited $44.6 billion bid. Though regulatory concerns make a bid by Google unlikely, it could play a role in bids by others.

Are these guys crybabies or what?

[mr friggles @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:10PM]

I HATE GOOGLE AND MICROSOFT EQUALLY!

Any chance maybe one will shoot the other's top intern, and that starts off a bloody vendetta war where EVERYONE dies (employees, friends, fam, customers) and it ends with both top execs having some big show down in a server room, but the smoke from one of their gun nozzle's sets off the sprinkler system, electrocuting them both?

[Jason Cox @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:11PM]

Yeah, Google, Microsoft gives me a crap load more APIs to interface with for their Live products than you do. So who's trying to protect their proprietary monopoly again?

[Eh @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:16PM]

Google is far more dangerous than Microsoft on the internet. Google has already gotten rid of every major advertising competitor, then they got rid of youtube as a competitor. Google is out of control, I think anything that hurts them right now is a VERY good thing, regardless who is hurting them.

This is one hell of a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

[MasterCKO @ Feb 4th 2008 5:02AM]

http://www.tshirthell.com/store/product.php?productid=812

Just thought that I would punctuate what you said (I agree) with this.

[Jamus @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:16PM]

"committed to openness, innovation, and the protection of privacy."

WTF? They got guts to say that.

[Myk @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:17PM]

I'm starting to get tired with Google and their bitching.

[nano404 @ Feb 3rd 2008 9:24PM]

From another article:
"At $31 a share, Yahoo believes the bid undervalues the company, two sources said."

Lol. I had to laugh. Can you really Undervalue Yahoo?