RSSFTC Will Investigate Google + DoubleClick: Did Microsoft Make the Call?
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published May 29, 2007, 2:28 PM
Early this morning, The New York Times reported that the US Federal Trade Commission would be expanding its otherwise normal investigation into the prospective merger deal between contextual advertising giant Google and display advertising giant DoubleClick, by issuing Google a "second request" for more information late last week.
The FTC has issued no statement on the affair, and has declined to answer questions, though the Times report and other subsequent news items are raising the question of whether the FTC is acting on its own accord, or at the behest of others - as one theory has it, Microsoft.
The NYT report cites the Electronic Privacy Information Center as having perhaps filed the pinnacle complaint just days after the merger announcement. The EPIC complaint charges that a merger of the two companies would lead to a merger of their databases and the technologies behind them.
"The acquisition of DoubleClick will permit Google to track both a person's Internet searches and a person's web site visits," reads EPIC's April complaint to the FTC. "This could impact the privacy interests of 233 million Internet users in North America, 314 million Internet users in Europe, and more than 1.1 billion Internet users around the world."
DoubleClick apparently took EPIC's allegations seriously enough to publish responses explaining why its database is distinct from Google's, and will remain so. A new DoubleClick brochure (PDF available here) explains how its DART technology extrapolates keyword performance data from user visits with respect to placement of keywords on Google, Yahoo, MSN, and smaller services such as Ask.com.
Based on that explanation, one could conclude that the database of DART's observations could not be merged with the database Google maintains of user searches.
To underscore that, DoubleClick released a statement cited by Financial Times this afternoon, stating there isn't really a "DART database" unto itself anyway.
"Information collected by DoubleClick DART ad serving technology belongs to DoubleClick's clients and not to DoubleClick," the statement reads. "Any and all information collected by DoubleClick is, and will remain, the property of the company's clients. Ownership rights, like the other terms of DoubleClick's client contracts, will be unaffected by any acquisition."
But the FT report also goes so far as to cite Microsoft as the "squeaky wheel" in the effort to have the FTC or Justice Dept. investigate the merger proposal, having publicly complained five days earlier than EPIC that a combination of the two companies could be anti-competitive.
"This proposed acquisition raises serious competition and privacy concerns in that it gives the Google DoubleClick combination unprecedented control in the delivery of online advertising, and access to a huge amount of consumer information by tracking what customers do online," wrote Microsoft's senior counsel Brad Smith on April 15. "We think this merger deserves close scrutiny from regulatory authorities to ensure a competitive online advertising market."
This despite the fact that Microsoft was reportedly the earlier bidder in the race for DoubleClick.
I’m still learning about online advertising and marketing so this comes from a consumer’s understanding. I’ve done a little research into this subject and it seems, as this is a war between businesses with Microsoft using terror tactics to scare consumers with the potential theft of personal ID information. Is this a real threat? If yes, than I can see why it should not be allowed. On the business side of it, how can small companies compete with giants like Microsoft and Google? Yes, it can be done. Because there will always be people who do not want to support the giants. I think a fresh viewpoint needs to be presented.
How does this concern consumers?
How does this concern small business?
I believe these two groups are being ignored and in my opinion I can only see this as a war of greed.
http://businessadminguide.blogspot.com/
Score: 0
the whole marger between google and doubleclick will be either a huge success or a huge failure due to privacy worries. Either way i look forward to what will happen.
Score: 0
"But the FT report also goes so far as to cite Microsoft as the "squeaky wheel" in the effort to have the FTC or Justice Dept. investigate the merger proposal, having publicly complained five days earlier than EPIC that a combination of the two companies could be anti-competitive.
"This proposed acquisition raises serious competition and privacy concerns in that it gives the Google DoubleClick combination unprecedented control in the delivery of online advertising, and access to a huge amount of consumer information by tracking what customers do online," wrote Microsoft's senior counsel Brad Smith on April 15. "We think this merger deserves close scrutiny from regulatory authorities to ensure a competitive online advertising market.""
1. Microsoft is just pissed because they didn't win the bid. 2.Microsoft complaining about another company being anticompetitive is just freaking funny. 3. I wonder how many of the FTC guys are in Microsoft's pocket.
Score: 0
Google has all those server farms located near nuclear power plants. There are a lot of folks associated with Google that aren't highly advertised. This could get extremely nasty. Welcome to the world of capitalism. Microsoft could very well end up with the short end of the stick on this one.
Score: 0
Google has built a lot of datacenters near many different kinds of power plants.
Missing what that really has to do with this though...
Score: 0
If I were Google, I wouldn't even operate any server farms in the US or have any assets here. I'd buy my own island and set up shop anywhere else. That way, the conservatives in government couldn't touch my company, couldn't sue me under their law, and couldn't even investigate me. Jeez, US Attorney scandals are okay, but by Bush, not legal capitalism!
Score: 0
rolfmao...
the conservatives in government couldn't touch my company, couldn't sue me under their law, and couldn't even investigate me. Jeez, US Attorney scandals are okay, but by Bush, not legal capitalism!
Talk about not understanding conservatism.
1.) Bush fired what, 8? How many did Clinton fire, eh? I believe it was somewhere around 93 or so?
2.) Conservatives are for free market, genius. It's the liberals who want to regulate everything (Alcohol, Tobacco, Gas, Guns, Video Games, you name it).
Sure, some from *each* party cross political lines. You'll always be able to find liberals backing conservative politics as well as RINOs backing liberal buffoonery, but by and large you seem to have the two political sides confused.
Score: 0
I have to agree with Zridling, although you made a salient point re Clinton(ugghhh, hate typing that name...Hillary even more).
Under Bush, executives of legal, Euro/Brit Exchange-traded gambling and money transfer companies have been arrested ad nauseam.
Even when totally off-US limits, i wouldn't put it past neocons to issue orders to arrest key executives anytime they wandered over here for business or pleasure... or to try to block Google access here until it complied...
Score: 0
I admit I'm confounded by the gambling bill. It makes no sense to me other than from a security stand-point, but even that is tenuous / questionable.
or to try to block Google access here until it complied
...with what? This is being pushed by Microsoft under a Democrat controlled House and Senate. The reps had nothing to do with it near as I can tell.
Score: 0
Pot > Kettle > Black
Microsoft Makes Largest Buy in History {Betanews.com}
But that's okay. Apparently Microsoft's buyout is complimentary, while Google's is obviously anti-competitive.
Score: 0
"But the FT report also goes so far as to cite Microsoft as the 'squeaky wheel' in the effort to have the FTC or Justice Dept. investigate the merger proposal, having publicly complained five days earlier than EPIC that a combination of the two companies could be anti-competitive."
Look who's talking.
Score: 0
Microsoft asking the FTC to go after someone else? Is this some kind of sad joke?
Score: 0
yes, it is.
Score: 0