by Kevin Coates | Apr 23, 2011 | Apple, Google
An interesting article that covers a lot of the issues about the latest iPhone (and now probably all smartphones) data protection controversy. The current debate raises several different issues: – is this legal under EU data protection rules? It looks as though several national DPOs are going to be looking at this; – do users who have agreed to the terms of service really know what it is they are agreeing to? Or is this a case of users accepting the default settings without really understanding – or perhaps caring? – possibly also the importance of network effects. It’s not clear so far if this location data is being kept by the operating system companies – Apple, Google, RIM etc – to improve their services, or is being passed on to network operators to help improve their networks. If the former, then we have another network effect – the more users a company has that uses your location services, then the more location feedback a company will receive, and the more it can improve the location services. Not a competition law problem, but potentially relevant to looking at questions of market power and barriers to entry. This article titled “iPhones and Android phones building vast databases for Google and Apple” was written by Charles Arthur, for The Guardian on Friday 22nd April 2011 16.20 UTC Apple and Google are using smartphones running their software to build gigantic databases for location-based services, according to new research following the Guardian’s revelations that iPhones and devices running Android collect location data about owners’ movements. iPhones and Android smartphones swap data – which...
by Kevin Coates | Apr 11, 2011 | Antitrust, Google
This article titled “Google wins approval for ITA travel search deal – but antitrust case looms” was written by Jemima Kiss, for guardian.co.uk on Monday 11th April 2011 12.36 UTC Google has been given approval for its takeover of travel search and recommendation service ITA by the US Justice Department, albeit with some fairly heavy strings attached that are designed to prevent the search giant taking advantage of its market position – and lining up a likely broader antitrust investigation. Nine months after Google announced its intended acquisition of ITA, the settlement reached with the Justice Department requires Google to maintain ITA’s software licence with rival flight search sites for five years, as well as its research and development funding. Google will also need to stablish internal firewalls to protect information about ITA’s customers and the Justice Department will be monitoring all of these requirements. Photo by HarshLight on Flickr. Some rights reserved Rival travel search firms – including Expedia, TripAdvisor and Kayak (which all some of whom use ITA’s software) – had lobbied hard in opposition to the 0m takeover. A coalition that also included consolidated airfare service Sabre Holdings and called itself Fairsearch.org seemed satisfied with the restrictions placed on Google, saying in a statement that the Justice Department’s settlement would ensure “that consumers will continue to benefit from vibrant competition and innovation in travel search”. Google had initially said it did not intend to launch a ticket sales service, though the Justice Department’s restrictions would not stop that happening. In an official blog post, Google’s senior vice president of commerce and local, Jeff Huber, said that...
by Kevin Coates | Sep 29, 2009 | Antitrust, Google
The DOJ and FTC have filed a joint statement of interest in respect of the proposed Google Books settlement. It’s noteworthy for a couple of things. First, they agreed a joint response. Given relations between the FTC and DOJ in recent years, that’s already an achievement. I met Tom Barnett’s chief of staff for an informal chat last September, and he said that even if there were a change in administration, he did not anticipate a fundamental change in enforcement policy, given that the DOJ staff largely agreed with the then enforcement policy. In light of the comments from Christine Varney and Jon Leibowitz in recent months – repeated again at Fordham last week – and in light of the joint filing in Google Books, it looks as though the chief of staff’s views were more optimistic than realistic. Second, the filing gives strong support in its opening paragraphs to the service that Google is trying to create – albeit balanced with an extensive analysis of the legal shortcomings of the proposal as it currently stands: The Proposed Settlement has the potential to breathe life into millions of works that are now effectively off limits to the public. By allowing users to search the text of millions of books at no cost, the Proposed Settlement would open the door to new research opportunities. Users with print disabilities would also benefit from the accessibility elements of the Proposed Settlement, and, if the Proposed Settlement were approved, full text access to tens of millions of books would be provided through institutional subscriptions. Finally, the creation of an independent, transparently-operated Book Rights...
by Kevin Coates | Sep 8, 2009 | Google
A lot has been written about Google trying to capture the second-click: the age-old conflict that Google faces between being a pure navigation service – “We get you where you want to go” – and being a media company – “We get you to our properties, where we make more money if you stay.” Now take a look at a Techcrunch interview with Eric Schmidt: So I don’t know how to characterize the next 10 years except to say that we’ll get to the point – the long-term goal is to be able to give you one answer, which is exactly the right answer over time. Okay, you know, the question I’ll ask today, how many Americans have – what percentage of Americans have passports?…The Google’s answer was a site, which was somebody who had attempted to answer that question and had multiple answers. It’s quite interesting actually to read…So you go to a very good definitive site. And what I’d like to do is to get to the point where we could read his site and then summarize what it says, and answer the question…Along with the citation and so forth and so on. This would take Google beyond the second click and make them the ultimate destination (and a lot closer to what Wolfram Alpha is trying to be). Google already has to deal with complaints – and litigation – from third party content providers arguing that Google piggy-backs on their content without providing an adequate return. Today Google can argue that the return they provide is driving traffic to third party sites. The more Google captures...