2012 FTC Antitrust Probe Into Google: Documents Exposed Reveal "real harm to consumers and to innovation"

[engine]

This exposure of the FTC's documents to the WSJ shows that some key staff at the FTC were really concerned over Google's search.

Key staff of the Federal Trade Commission concluded in 2012 that Google Inc. used anticompetitive tactics and abused its monopoly power in ways that harmed Internet users and competitors, a far harsher analysis of Google’s business than was previously known.

The staff report from the agency’s bureau of competition, which hasn’t before been disclosed, recommended the commission bring a lawsuit challenging three separate Google practices, a move that would have triggered one of the highest-profile antitrust cases since the Justice Department sued Microsoft Corp. in the 1990s.2012 FTC Antitrust Probe Into Google: Documents Exposed Reveal "real harm to consumers and to innovation" [wsj.com]

“This document appears to show that the FTC had direct evidence from Google of intentional search bias,” said Luther Lowe, the vice president of public policy for Yelp.

The Wall Street Journal viewed portions of the document after the agency inadvertently disclosed it as part of a Freedom of Information Act request. The FTC declined to release the undisclosed pages and asked the Journal to return the document, which it declined to do.

[Samizdata]

this is the first time that Google's teflon has been dented

The dent is undeniable, but it was made two years ago and was very public.

All the details are available on the FTC website, including dissenting statements by individual Commissioners.

Start here: [ftc.gov...] (statements are in the Related Actions column).

There are many quotes to cherry-pick whichever side you are on.

As a cover-up it would surely be the most incompetent ever attempted.

...

[Whitey]

Here's an interesting article revealing the letters and conversations between Google and Yelp, Tripadvisor and Amazon :
[skift.com...]

Well worth the read

[Samizdata]

Well worth the read

More useful to read the (still incomplete but much bigger) excerpts from the report acquired by the WSJ and linked - unfiltered by sloppy journalism - at the bottom of the article itself:

[skift.com...]

Whether the WSJ is holding back the missing pages or never received them is unclear.

Whatever they contain, the Commissioners will have examined them, and their various detailed conclusions on that report and those from other FTC departments are contained in their statements on the FTC website.

Their conclusions are highly critical of Google and have been public knowledge for over two years.

And they are easily found on Google search.

...

[glakes]

The Senate antitrust chairman is opening a probe into the FTC investigation regarding Google. See [sfgate.com...]

There is enough evidence to suggest that Google had direct communications with President Obama throughout the investigation, and it's public knowledge that Google executives are some of Obama's biggest campaign contributors. Add on nearly $17 million in lobby spending, and it's crystal clear Google is well connected politically.

The chairman of the senate antitrust committee (Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee) seems more inclined to find something to hang over Obama's head instead of focusing on the damage Google has and is doing to free markets. We need better leaders to chair these committees.

[EditorialGuy]

The Senate antitrust chairman is opening a probe into the FTC investigation regarding Google.

And why not? One of his top campaign contributors is Microsoft.

[Shepherd]

Yeah, $4,400/year seams like real influential money...

[EditorialGuy]

Well, it isn't only about the money. It's also about political grandstanding, as most senate hearings are. (If you're a Republican senator, what better way to make points with your party peers than to attack the Obama administration?)

[glakes]

In the recent news story titled "Lifting the covers on ‘Obamoogle’" it is noted:

Mr. Schmidt is not on record donating to an Obama campaign, National Public Radio reports, “Eric Schmidt’s wife, Wendy, gave Obama’s campaigns $47,600.

Additionally, records show how cozy Google is with Obama when the news story states:

Since President Obama took office, The Wall Street Journal reports, employees of Google “have visited the White House for meetings with senior officials about 230 times, or an average of roughly once a week.” Google’s top lobbyist had more than 60 meetings at the White House. That’s more meetings than most of Mr. Obama’s Cabinet members.

Read the whole story and other interesting facts at: [washingtontimes.com...]

And yes, Republican Senator and antitrust chairman Mike Lee could care less about how Google has abused our free market, but would rather instead focus on pointing fingers at Obama. Senator Lee's spokeswoman stated:

“We are not likely at this time to re-examine the underlying merits of the investigation, which was closed,” Long said. “Our interest is in oversight.”

After I read that statement, it was quite apparent that Senator Lee could care less about his constituents, small businesses and consumers. Senator Lee would instead start a probe to wage political war. With such poor leaders chairing the antitrust committee, I think it's time that Senator Lee resign from office or at least step aside to allow someone to take the reigns that prioritizes the interests of taxpayers before politics.

[aristotle]

glakes wrote:
After I read that statement, it was quite apparent that Senator Lee could care less about his constituents, small businesses and consumers. Senator Lee would instead start a probe to wage political war

You're exactly right, glakes. That's what this new probe is really all about. Most conservative U.S. politicians don't like President Obama, don't like the FTC, and don't much like Google either. This gives them an opportunity to "wage political war" against all three.

[IanKelley]

If the antitrust case had legs, and if the senator's goal was to hurt Obamas image, wouldn't it make sense to both blame Obama AND reopen the case so that the resulting antitrust findings could then be used as further ammo?

To me his not pushing to reopen the case would seem to imply there isn't enough there.

[mrengine]

To me his not pushing to reopen the case would seem to imply there isn't enough there.

How can you draw such a conclusion when the "probe" involves the possibility of high level political influence in the FTC commissioner's decision to not pursue legal action against Google?

To me it looks more like the senator does not want to tangle with Google in the way he announced his intent to not reopen the case before even getting a small amount of information from his own probe. When you look at it from this perspective, it makes the senator's probe look like a farce. American politics at its best...

[IanKelley]

It depends on whether or not you believe his goal is to hurt the Obama admin and therefore the democrats in the next election. If that is indeed his goal then asking for the investigation to be reopened is the only way to really make it look like it was closed not because it had no merit but because of outside influence.

If it was closed for good reason then there's no scandal.

[mrengine]

If it was closed for good reason then there's no scandal.

Maybe I misread your original comment, because I feel the same as you (quoted in this post).

What strikes me as peculiar is that even before the probe starts the senator has already dismissed the notation of reopening the FTC case against Google. One would think the senator would make that decision after the probe was completed, or once enough evidence has been gathered, not less than a week after announcing the launch of the probe itself. If the FTC case against Google was tainted, I would think the case should be reopened.

[Shepherd]

We are not likely at this time to re-examine...

at this time. I think you find out if there was an issue with the oversight and then, if there was an issue, you have the option of re-opening the investigation.

[EditorialGuy]

What strikes me as peculiar is that even before the probe starts the senator has already dismissed the notation of reopening the FTC case against Google.

He can't reopen the FTC case against Google. He can only investigate how the FTC reached its decision.

It depends on whether or not you believe his goal is to hurt the Obama admin and therefore the democrats in the next election.

This isn't about hurting the Democrats (the voters couldn't care less), it's about scoring anti-Obama points with his peers. If he can squeeze a few more dollars in campaign contributions from Google's competitors (such as Microsoft, his sixth-largest donor), so much the better.

[IanKelley]

It seems to me that voters would care quite a bit if there was an antitrust case against the household word for search with implications of corruption in the FTC and Obama administration. It would be a political home run.

Whatever the motivation, whether it be looking good for peers or constituents, hurting the administration, brown nosing for contributions from Google's competition, or even sincerely trying to get to the truth, if there was even a little merit to the case you'd expect him to recommend it be reopened.

[aristotle]

Obviously there's no practical way to compensate all the victims of Google's misdeeds. The "real harm to consumers and to innovation" can't be undone, and Google has already used the information it stole from Yelp, TripAdvisor, and Amazon.

At least the final settlement of the FTC case did include a promise from Google to end its misconduct. Then-Chairman Jon Leibowitz said at the time that Google’s voluntary changes deliver “more relief for American consumers faster than any other option.” If Google is keeping its promise to stop its misconduct, that's a good development, but it's only a partial remedy.

But Senator Lee isn't interested in rectifying any wrongs anyway. The purpose of his probe is to wage political war against his perceived enemies. Evidently he feels that he already has plenty of ammunition just from what was revealed in the part of the FTC report that was accidentally leaked.

[Brett_Tabke]

Europe readies the hammer:

[webmasterworld.com...]