What Does Google Say About a Break Up?
A Google spokesperson addressed this demand for eWEEK:
"We totally understand that with size and success comes scrutiny. Although
given their track record, even if we broke Google in half tomorrow, Consumer
Watchdog would probably insist that we split halves into quarters."
Google's gallows humor aside, breaking up the company is
untenable. Google wouldn't make any money. With the exception of search and
YouTube, which are popular all over the world, the other services wouldn't
survive.
More than 97 percent of Google's revenues come from
advertising related to keyword advertising paired with its search engine.
Separate those two and Google couldn't support the free services such as Gmail,
Buzz or Google Apps, which is offered in free and enterprise versions.
YouTube, by dint of its millions of users, may stand on
its own because it is building a display ad business. Gmail, like Google's
search, features keyword advertising.
As for Google Apps, there are many online
collaboration suites that already don't make money that get bought out by other
businesses looking to plug holes.
There is another issue to consider. Microsoft, which was
found to be engaging in anticompetitive practices for bundling Internet
Explorer with its Windows operating system, was not broken up a decade ago.
A federal appeals court in June 2001
smacked down a lower court's ruling that Microsoft be broken into two companies
as a remedy for anticompetitive practices.
If a court could not see fit to break up a convicted
monopolist, then how could anyone expect the DOJ to break up Google, which has
not been formally accused of such transgressions?
Simpson also argues Google's importance as a gateway to
the Web means that the company should be regarded as a public utility and
regulated. This is a possibility, but will the DOJ be convinced Google is a
utility the way, say, water and electricity are treated in the United States?
Has the Information Age progressed to the point where
services provided by Google are as vital to consumers as water and heat? That
is an interesting argument.
Failing these solutions, Simpson asked the DOJ to heavily
tax Google with financial penalties. "Perhaps the
amount could be tied to paying back consumers for monetizing their private
information and content without compensating them."








