EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

09.06.10

Microsoft Hypocrisy: Google Accuses Microsoft of Giving Google Legal Trouble Over Search Impartiality and Privacy

Posted in FUD, Google, Marketing, Microsoft, Search at 2:56 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

“But rather than a search engine or even a “decision engine”, Bing also appears to be a spin engine, in that it provides partisan answers to controversial topics, such as Steve Ballmer’s propensity to throw chairs to blow off stress.”

Christian Einfeldt

Summary: ‘Consumer’ ‘Watchdog’ (AstroTurfing) and action from Texas Attorney General is linked to Microsoft, which is trying to fight against Google in nefarious new ways

GOOGLE is under fire right now. Does Google deserve scrutiny? Sure. But to what extent is this overplayed by Google’s competitors, notably Microsoft?

Well, Microsoft is trying to characterise Google as the “evil empire” because no other tactic has worked for Microsoft against Google, which not only succeeds in search but also threatens Windows and Office (with Linux and Apps/SaaS, respectively).

The news about Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is not so new anymore. There’s no news to “break” here, but an analysis will hopefully prove useful. We will try to put things within context. There are already many discussions about it and a lot of articles too, e.g. [1, 2, 3, 4].

First of all, Microsoft Florian takes Microsoft’s side in this matter which has nothing to do with patents. For those who don’t know, Microsoft Florian basically resorted to just attacking any large competitor of Microsoft. It’s not about “FOSS patents” and all that malarkey. A short while ago this Microsoft campaigner/booster wrote: “It’s weak that #Google just blames the Texas antitrust investigation on #Microsoft – that’s #IBM style diversion, not a substantive defense.”

“Microsoft Florian has in general joined the other Microsoft AstroTurfers…”It is worth noting that Microsoft MVP Miguel de Icaza has sort of joined forces with Florian and that small clique. They are trolling the FFII right now (that’s right, they do! They are making fun of the FFII and suggesting conflicts of interests, just as Dan Lyons did to Groklaw without any basis). Microsoft proponents think alike. Microsoft Florian has in general joined the other Microsoft AstroTurfers (out in the open even!) and right now he trolls the FFII, Groklaw (yesterday he wrote “Groklie” again), the FSF, the OIN, and just about any group whose interests are opposite to Microsoft’s, including Techrights. Be aware of so-called, self-appointed “watchdogs”, who happen to include Microsoft Florian. Those so-called ‘watchdogs’ give Google more bad publicity, which is not entirely unprecedented. It’s an amazing case of lobbying and grouping of Microsoft allies. Google was recently attacked by proxy in the EU. That’s one where Microsoft even admitted its role as satellites’ centre of gravity/master, using its partners to file antitrust complaints against Google.

The latest case from Texas has been analysed reasonably well by the press this time. Journalists at least bothered to mention Microsoft’s hand, crediting the accusations to Google:

“We recognize that as Google grows, we’re going to face more questions about how our business works,” Deputy General Counsel Don Harrison said in a blog post.

Google pointed out in its statement that attorneys who also work with Microsoft Corp represent two of the companies.

Well, the one manipulating search results is Microsoft (last covered in the previous post), so they should go after Microsoft. Privacy issues apply equally well to Microsoft and we explained this point many times before. Microsoft also spies at operating systems/applications level.

Microsoft denies its role to the press, but it cannot quite deny evidence. It’s rather revealing:

In a related Web site posting, Microsoft said Friday that it was not involved in a campaign to attack Google in the courtroom, but that it was a member of Competitive Online Marketplace, an organization that includes Foundem.

Microsoft also said attorneys who have worked with the company have also represented myTriggers and TradeComet.

More here:

The cases cover those brought by shopping comparison Websites Foundem and myTriggers, and search directory SourceTools, all three of whom have ties to Microsoft.

Here is a full, direct quote:

Google’s suggest Microsoft’s involvement

The most interesting part in this whole story is the fact that Google said the party’s involved are all financially backed by Microsoft suggesting that the Software maker is somehow behind the whole thing. Amir Efrati of the WSJ:

“Google said Foundem is backed by ICOMP, an organization funded largely by Microsoft and added that TradeComet and myTriggers are represented by the same antitrust attorneys Microsoft uses.

Microsoft did admit to helping small company’s that felt Google unfairly targeted them by suggesting they file a complaint to antitrust authorities or by pointing them in the right direction, but said that’s as far as it went the company denied any direct involvement. All company’s involved denied any Microsoft connection.

It’s just like TurboHercules and T3, isn’t it?

Groklaw has the best analysis we’ve found so far and it obviates the need to make another. It’s a very detailed breakdown of the situation, including the many players at hand. From the opening (more here):

I guess you heard that the Texas attorney general has opened an investigation into antitrust complaints against Google, complaints lodged by Foundem, SourceTool, and myTriggers.com. Them again? Their complaints are not new. Here’s Google’s blog post about it.

And likely you heard about that utterly tasteless ad in Times Square from Consumer Watchdog, a cartoon of a creepy looking Eric Schmidt handing ice cream to children and asking for their secrets.

I think I can explain both events, because they are part of one campaign. Or as American Lawyer describes [PDF] the lawyers behind this, they are on a crusade against Google. The article is titled “The Google-Slayers”. Guess who the lawyers on this crusade have as a client? Microsoft. They handle Microsoft’s antitrust work. Guess who sent the first complainant to these lawyers, which led to this crusade? Microsoft. The jumping off point.

So. A crusade to destroy Google. By folks who count Microsoft as an important client, with new clients, at least one of them directly referred to the “crusaders” by Microsoft and the rest now under their umbrella. My stars, gentlemen. Where is your subtlety?

As we’ve shown before, ‘Consumer’ ‘Watchdog’ is an AstroTurfing group, probably paid for by Microsoft. “Wired did a write up of the weekly “screw Google” meetings a year or two ago,” said to us a reader yesterday. “These new lawsuits are the fruit of those efforts.”

Interestingly enough, ThistleWeb pointed out that the MSBBC keeps acting as a cogwheel, thanks to Microsoft sympathiser Maggie Shiels. “I’d love to say it was nice to see a journo investigate the funding behind a group,” he explained, “but I don’t expect much of the #BBC” (the BBC gives a platform to the AstroTurfing group which ushers or supports the lawsuits, putting public opinion/consent behind them).

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

2 Comments

  1. saulgoode said,

    September 6, 2010 at 8:46 pm

    Gravatar

    It’s just like TurboHercules and T3, isn’t it?

    There is a distinction in that IBM openly admits to engaging in exclusionary licensing deals with their customers. The question that the EU courts are being asked to address is whether IBM’s licensing practices constitute violation of the European Union’s anti-competition rules.

    From a “tech rights” perspective the distinction is significant. Free software advocates have a vested interest in the laws which affect software freedom — not so much in whether a particular corporation chooses to engage in activities which violate those laws.

    Furthermore, the allegations being levied against Google have nothing to do with software freedom, whereas the IBM investigation does concern the software freedoms of their customers; though to IBM’s credit they seemingly do not rely upon copyright legislation, or even patent law (yet), in attempting to limit their customers’ freedoms.

    twitter Reply:

    The similarity is hypocrisy and waste of judicial resources. Microsoft, the chief violator of software freedom, is harassing their competitors with lawsuits through proxies. This ties up the courts with relative trivialites and wastes everyone’s time and money, especially IBM and Google’s who are mostly proponents of software freedom now. A victory by TH would give us the “freedom” to run some of IBM’s non free software on Windows. A victory by any of these jerks in Texas would do even less good. Reasonable anti-trust cases should address Microsoft’s clearly anti-competitive manipulation of OEMs that force us all to pay for Windows when we buy a new computer, regardless of what OS we want to use. There’s enough evidence in Comes vrs Microsoft to win such a case and there’s more than enough smoke regarding netbooks to warrant extensive discovery.

What Else is New


  1. Links 16/8/2018: MAAS 2.4.1, Mesa 18.2 RC3

    Links for the day



  2. USPTO Craziness: Changing Rules to Punish PTAB Petitioners and Reward Microsoft for Corruption at ISO

    The US patent office proposes charging/imposing on applicants that are not customers of Microsoft a penalty; there’s also an overtly and blatantly malicious move whose purpose is to discourage petitions against wrongly-granted (by the USPTO) patents



  3. The Demise of US Software Patents Continues at the Federal Circuit

    Software patents are rotting away in the United States; it remains to be seen when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will truly/fully honour 35 U.S.C. § 101 and stop granting such patents



  4. Almost Two Months After the ILO Ruling Staff Representative Brumme is Finally Back on the Job at EPO

    Ion Brumme gets his position at the EPO back, owing to the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organization (ILO-AT) ruling back in July; things, however, aren't rosy for the Office as a whole



  5. Links 15/8/2018: Akademy 2018 Wrapups and More Intel Defects

    Links for the day



  6. Antiquated Patenting Trick: Adding Words Like 'Apparatus' to Make Abstract Ideas Look/Sound Like They Pertain to or Contain a 'Device'

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101) still maintains that abstract ideas are not patent-eligible; so applicants and law firms go out of their way to make their ideas seem as though they're physical



  7. Open Invention Network (OIN) Member Companies Need to Become Unanimous in Opposition to Software Patents

    Opposition to abstract software patents, which even the SCOTUS and the Federal Circuit nowadays reject, would be strategically smart for OIN; but instead it issues a statement in support of a GPL compliance initiative



  8. President Battistelli 'Killed' the EPO; António Campinos Will 'Finish the Job'

    The EPO is shrinking, but this is being shrewdly disguised using terms like "efficiency" and a low-profile President who keeps himself in the dark



  9. Links 14/8/2018: Virtlyst 1.2.0, Blender 2.8 Planning Update, Zorin OS 12.4, FreeBSD 12.0 Alpha

    Links for the day



  10. Berkheimer Changed Nothing and Invalidation Rates of Abstract Software Patents Remain Very High

    Contrary to repetitive misinformation from firms that 'sell' services around patents, there is no turnaround or comeback for software patents; the latest numbers suggest a marginal difference at best — one that may be negligible considering the correlation between expected outcomes and actions (the nature of risk analysis)



  11. Lockton Insurance Brokers Exploiting Patent Trolls to Sell Insurance to the Gullible

    Demonstrating what some people have dubbed (and popularised) "disaster capitalism", Lockton now looks for opportunities to profit from patent trolls, in the form of "insurance" (the same thing Microsoft does)



  12. Patent Lawyers Writing Patent Law for Their Own Enrichment Rather Than for Innovation

    We have become detached from the original goals and come to the point where patent offices aren't necessarily run by people qualified for the job of advancing science and technology; they, unlike judges, only seem to care about how many patents get granted, irrespective of their quality/merit



  13. Links 13/8/2018: Linux 4.18 and GNU Linux-libre 4.18 Arrive

    Links for the day



  14. PTAB is Loathed by Patent Maximalists Because It Can Potentially Invalidate Thousands of Software Patents (More Than Courts Can Handle)

    The US patent system has become more resistant to software patents; courts, however, are still needed to invalidate such patents (a potentially expensive process) because the USPTO continues to grant these provided some fashionable buzzwords/hype waves are utilised (e.g. "facial recognition", "blockchain", "autonomous vehicles")



  15. Gene Quinn and 'Dallas Innovates' as Couriers of Agenda for Patent Trolls Like iPEL

    Failing to hide their real purpose and malicious agenda, sites whose real purpose is to promote a lot of patent litigation produce puff pieces, even for patently unethical trolls such as iPEL



  16. Software Patents, Secured by 'Smart' and 'Intelligent' Tricks, Help Microsoft and Others Bypass Alice/Section 101

    A look at the use of fashionable trends and buzzwords to acquire and pass around dubious software patents, then attempting to guard these from much-needed post-Alice scrutiny



  17. Keep Boston (and Massachusetts in General) From Becoming an Infestation Zone for Patent Litigation

    Boston, renowned for research and innovation, has become somewhat of a litigation hotbed; this jeopardises the state's attractiveness (except perhaps to lawyers)



  18. Links 12/8/2018: Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, Mesa 18.1.6 Release Notice, New Linux Imminent

    Links for the day



  19. Thomas Massie's “Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act of 2018” (RALIA) Would Put the US Patent System in the Lions' (or Trolls') Mouth Again

    An anti-§ 101 and anti-PTAB bill from Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) strives to remove quality control; but by handing the system back to patent trolls he and his proponents simply strive to create more business of litigation, at the expense of innovation



  20. EPO-Style Problem-Solution: Tackling Backlog by Granting Lots of Low-Quality (Bogus) European Patents, Causing a Surge in Troll/Frivolous Litigation

    The EPO's lack of interest in genuine patent quality (measuring "quality" in terms of speed, not actual quality) may mean nothing but a litigation epidemic; many of these lawsuits would be abusive, baseless; those harmed the most would be small businesses that cannot afford a legal defense and would rather settle with those who exploit questionable patents, notably patent trolls



  21. Links 11/8/2018: PGP Clean Room 1.0, Ring-KDE 3.0.0, Julia 1.0

    Links for the day



  22. Propaganda Sites of Patent Trolls and Litigators Have Quit Trying to Appear Impartial or Having Integrity

    The lobbying groups of patent trolls (which receive money from such trolls) carry on meddling in policy and altering perception that drives policy; we present some new examples



  23. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Still Try to Undermine Inter Partes Reviews (“IPRs”), Refusing to Accept Patent Quality

    The patent maximalists in the United States, seeing that the USPTO is moving away from patent maximalism, is desperate for a turnaround; prominent patent maximalists take it all out on PTAB



  24. The Unified Patent Court (UPC) Agreement is Paralysed, So Team UPC is Twisting Old News

    Paralysis of the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPCA) means that people are completely forgetting about its very existence; those standing to benefit from it (patent litigation firms) are therefore recycling and distorting old news



  25. Patents as Profiteering Opportunities for Law Firms Rather Than Drivers of Innovation for Productive Companies

    A sample of news from yesterday; the patent microcosm is still arguing about who pays attorneys’ fees (not whether these fees are justified) and is constantly complaining about the decline in patent litigation, which means fewer and lower attorneys’ fees (less work for them)



  26. Links 9/8/2018: Mesa 18.2 RC2, Cockpit 175, WPA-2 Hash Cracking

    Links for the day



  27. Patent Maximalists -- Not Reformers -- Are the Biggest Threat to the Viability of the Patent System and Innovation

    Those who strive to infinitely expand patent scope are rendering the patent system obsolete and completely losing sight of the very purpose of the patent system, whose sanity US courts and lawmakers gradually restore (one ruling and one bill at a time)



  28. WeMove.EU Tackles Low Patent Quality at the European Patent Office (EPO)

    The breadth of European Patents, which now cover even nature itself, worries public interest groups; Team UPC, however, wants patent scope to expand further and António Campinos has expressed his intention to further increase the number of grants



  29. Links 8/8/2018: KDE Neon for Testing, New LibreOffice Release, Dart 2.0

    Links for the day



  30. Links 7/8/2018: TCP Vulnerability in Linux, Speck Crypto Code Candidate for Removal

    Links for the day


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts