

News Archive
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
Ohio AG Files Against Google in Anti-Trust Suit
April 30, 2010, 12:35 pmQuestion: is it anti-competitive to regulate your own search advertising program? Answer: yes, according to myTriggers.com or the Ohio Attorney General. When Google sued for $335,000 in backpayments on AdSense clicks, erstwhile Google advertiser/competitor myTriggers.com filed a countersuit alleging Google had dinged their quality score, resulting in a 10,000% increase in costs, because the big G realized myTriggers was a competitor.
This week, the OH AG filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of myTriggers, arguing that dismissing the case as Google asks “would immunize an entire industry from the reach of this state’s antitrust laws.” MediaPost reports on myTriggers’s arguments:
MyTriggers argues that the drop in quality score was part of an anticompetitive scheme “to ensure that Google can continue to exert control over search advertising.” The shopping search site further asserted that it posed a threat to Google by monetizing searches on a cost-per-action basis, as opposed to Google’s cost-per-click model.In addition, myTriggers claims that it wasn’t able to draw much traffic without advertising on Google because of the company’s dominance in search.
Notably, this case has drawn the most attention to date because one of its litigants is Microsoft’s chief outside counsel on anti-trust issues.
Meanwhile, Google counters with an appeal to federal law:
the federal Communications Decency Act’s “good samaritan” provisions shields it from liability for any steps taken to remove potentially objectionable content.
Google argues that its actions as a publisher — including lowering companies’ quality scores — are the type of activity that is protected by the statute.
I’m finding myTrigger’s accusations a bit hard to swallow. I don’t think it’s far-fetched to claim that Google might try to stifle competitors advertising on the search giant—but a 10,000% increase means their average CPC went from, say, 50¢ to $500,000. (And since the suit was for $335,000, we’ll say it was 33.5¢—and they got one click.) I’m also not sure that Google has to allow them to advertise at all (though taking their money if Google really did increase their costs prohibitively does sound anti-competitive), or that myTriggers has a right to advertise on Google. Google’s argument sounds suspect, too, though. Potentially objectionable content?
What do you think? Is advertising on Google a good way to promote a rival search service? Does Google perceive myTriggers as a threat?
Pilgrim’s Partners: SponsoredReviews.com – Bloggers earn cash, Advertisers build buzz!





