Any analogy between a potential antitrust case against Google and the antitrust case against Microsoft ignores the underlying facts and is a misguided over-simplification of the complicated nature of the on-line search market.
When a company with a half billion customers moves from being the social network into gaining a financial grip over consumers and web developers, Pandora's box is open. Let's hope the Federal Trade Commission shuts the lid very soon.
Much of what motivates supporters of an investigation of Google at the Federal Trade Commission is not a genuine desire to protect consumers, but a desire to protect competitors from Google's intense competitive nature.
Examining the larger set of documents from the initial phase of the Skyhook trial against Google is opening a window into Google executives' views on how they sought to reinforce Google's monopoly and collect personal information from its users.
The discussion of Google and antitrust has shifted in recent weeks from relevant market and anticompetitive behavior to consumer happiness. The problem is that consumers are not always the best judges of their own welfare.
People deserve to be back in control of their online experience, not merely a data point in a product marketed to advertisers. But there is no "market" incentive for this to happen. Only regulation can bring it about.