Google faces new Antitrust complaints in Europe

Brussels — Google has tackled new accusations on Tuesday that it was blocking a small European search service, limiting the use of its powerful system to attract advertisers.

A French company, 1plusV, which owns the Ejustice .fr, one of the three companies that have already deposited accusations against Google, has said that he sent a supplementary complaint to the European Commission, the European Union's executive body.

The Commission initiated a formal antitrust investigation of Google, three months ago looking for evidence that Google had the power to shut out competition and restrict advertisers to do business with other search engines.

A Commission spokesman, Amadeu Altafaj, said "give Google the ability to comment on the accusations levelled before deciding on what, if any further steps to take."

Google's advertising service, called AdSense, allows advertisers to buy a keyword, when you type in a search query, produces a link advertising alongside the search results. Marie-Cécile Rameau, a lawyer who represents 1plusV, said that Google was preventing the websites operated by 1plusV from using AdSense with its search technology.

MS. Rameau, who practice "hinders development of efficient vertical search engines" that could compete with the specialist services of Google, said in Brussels. It also prevented consumers access to technologies that could provide them with more search options, he said.

At Verney, a Google spokesman, said that it continued to work closely with the European Commission to explain many different parts of our business. " He refused to comment on specific allegations from 1plusV.

Echoing earlier statements from Google on the case in Europe, Mr. Verney said the company had "always tried to do the right thing for our users and advertisers" and added, "there is always room for improvement."

In a complaint to the regulatory authorities a year ago, the European Ejustice. fr claimed that Google has removed most of its pages to an online index. Consequently, the ejustice said visits to its site suddenly dropped so sharply that was actually invisible on the Web.

But he said that the action was necessary because Ejustice. fr was violating its guidelines on how to make your website findable in Google search engine. That was a problem, according to Google, because users might end up never find a Web page with the answer to their question — just several pages of search results.

Bruno Guillard, owner of 1plusV, said Tuesday that Google had begun to make those pages findable again on its search engine as part of a process known as whitelisting, which started after the European Union regulators launched their formal investigation on 30 November.

MS. Rameau, the lawyer said, "The whitelisting massive since the opening of proceedings by the Commission clearly demonstrates that the blacklist, in March, was completely arbitrary".

Mr. Guillard said Google's actions meant losses for its holding of "a lot of millions" of dollars, but he refused to give a specific number. Aides to Mr. Guillard, said the company was still calculate total losses.

Mr. Guillard also said Google's actions meant that another site powered by 1plusV, Eguides, had lost a contract with the French national library to help make their resources available online.

"Due to traffic collapse" French library "understandably thought Eguides. fr was no longer a suitable partner and signed an agreement with Microsoft," said 1plusV.

Antitrust fight against the App Store will be tough

Apple faces antitrust little threat, the new App Store rules that require content sellers to hand over 30% of their revenue, a legal expert said today.

"It would be a steep uphill, uphill," said Hillard Sterling, an antitrust lawyer and partner with the law firm headquartered in Chicago Freeborn & Peters. "The challengers would show that Apple has foreclosed the market competition."But there are a lot of platforms where publishers can offer their products outside the App Store. "

On Tuesday, Apple unveiled its subscription model for App Store developers and confirmed that it will take 30% of revenues from all content sold within applications. The change also requires that current apps delete links to external purchasing options by 30 June.

The new model affects more newspaper and magazine publishers--who are eager to offer subscriptions to the owners of iPhone and iPad--but also mandates changes long overdue apps like Amazon Kindle. It will be necessary to remove access inside-the-app for bookseller e-Store and offer the same prices for purchases made in-app as it does for e-books purchased through its Web site.

Almost immediately, the questions have been raised about possible antitrust actions against Apple. But Sterling is a dead-end.

"Apple's Conduct, while excluding, not anti-competitive," said Sterling. "An axiom consecrated in antitrust is that it has meant to protect competition, not competitors".

To make an antitrust case, plaintiffs would have to demonstrate that the new App Store rules preventing companies to sell their content, said Sterling.

"And that's not an effort. Can offer their products through alternatives, such as the Google Android market, "said Sterling.

Wednesday, Google announced a Pass, your subscription plan for Android applications created by the publishers of newspapers and magazines. A Pass will imitate Apple model in some ways but reported only a withdrawal fee 10% revenue sharing for developers.

A possible defense Apple would add the difficulties for developers thinking of suing Apple, or Government regulators are considering legal action.

"Apple can probably create a plausible technical explanation for its rules," said Sterling. "Perhaps we should say that the products must be properly encoded to operate through the App Store to minimize the technical vulnerability."

Yesterday, Apple does not mention this defence for its new rules, arguing instead that in-app purchases will be more convenient for customers and offer publishers "a brand new opportunity to expand access to their digital content."

For all the obstacles facing antitrust effort against Apple, Sterling believes that the company could be pressed by regulators to change the terms of the App Store. Apple has addressed the U.S. Government's control before, both in 2009, when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) started an inquiry into Apple's rejection of Google Voice app for iPhone and last year, when the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asked Apple intends to prohibit all applications created with cross-platform development tools.

Apple caved to pressure in both cases at the end giving Google the green light and the Elimination of the prohibition of tools.

"[The Government regulators] may decide to pass, that as a practical matter, can make a judge [in any antitrust case] be more inclined to moderate the rules App Store and host the competing products," said Sterling. ' But so far, the Government adopted a cautious approach--rattle the Sabre and convince companies to reach an accommodation--rather than start a lawsuit imprudent that wastes time and money.

If the Department of Justice, or another federal agency takes this approach, Sterling provides that "cooler heads will prevail," that means Apple would probably back off its current position if pushed.

Even so, it is likely that these concerns do not disappear.

"We'll see more of this, what with new markets such as mobile phones and tablets and with the lines Blurring between partner and competitor," said Sterling.

Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and General technology breaking news for Computerworld. Follow Gregg on Twitter at @ gkeizer or subscribe to Gregg's RSS feed. His e-mail address is gkeizer@computerworld.com.

To learn more about drm and legal issues of Computerworld DRM and legal issues topic Center.

For more enterprise computing news, visit Computerworld. Story copyright © 2010 Computerworld Inc. All rights reserved.