Comments on: Kinderstart v. Google Antitrust Coverage http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/07/10/kinderstart-v-google-antitrust-coverage/ Academic commentary on law, business, economics and more Thu, 18 Mar 2010 17:46:53 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Frank http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/07/10/kinderstart-v-google-antitrust-coverage/comment-page-1/#comment-9499 Frank Tue, 11 Jul 2006 11:56:09 +0000 http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/07/10/kinderstart-v-google-antitrust-coverage/#comment-9499 Thanks for the update! I'm no antitrust expert, but I do have a sense that there are some important fairness issues here; see, e.g., this pose from a few days ago: http://www.nyu.edu/classes/siva/archives/003243.html#more My very modest proposal for companies like Kinderstart comes at the end of this little piece: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=888327 If we are regulating credit bureaus, we should have some way of regulating comparably powerful data managers. Thanks for the update! I’m no antitrust expert, but I do have a sense that there are some important fairness issues here; see, e.g., this pose from a few days ago:

http://www.nyu.edu/classes/siva/archives/003243.html#more

My very modest proposal for companies like Kinderstart comes at the end of this little piece:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=888327

If we are regulating credit bureaus, we should have some way of regulating comparably powerful data managers.

]]> By: Joshua Wright http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/07/10/kinderstart-v-google-antitrust-coverage/comment-page-1/#comment-9401 Joshua Wright Mon, 10 Jul 2006 20:15:10 +0000 http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/07/10/kinderstart-v-google-antitrust-coverage/#comment-9401 Thanks Keith. You are right that the other claims appear much more lively as a theoretical matter. As far as the antitrust claims go, and holding aside Google's protected speech argument, I just don't see how Kinderstart shows that the alleged ranking "devaluation" is actionable Section 2 conduct when the complaint itself suggests that Google does not have monopoly power and the algorithm plainly has competitive merit. Thanks Keith. You are right that the other claims appear much more lively as a theoretical matter. As far as the antitrust claims go, and holding aside Google’s protected speech argument, I just don’t see how Kinderstart shows that the alleged ranking “devaluation” is actionable Section 2 conduct when the complaint itself suggests that Google does not have monopoly power and the algorithm plainly has competitive merit.

]]> By: Keith http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/07/10/kinderstart-v-google-antitrust-coverage/comment-page-1/#comment-9391 Keith Mon, 10 Jul 2006 19:17:50 +0000 http://www.truthonthemarket.com/2006/07/10/kinderstart-v-google-antitrust-coverage/#comment-9391 Very interesting Josh. I'm inclined to agree with you and Eric Goldman that the antitrust claim doesn't have merit. More intriguing is the defamation claim. One could imagine a defamatory page ranking system in theory. But there's no indication of any malice on Google's part toward Kinderstart. Indeed, algorithmic ranking systems like Google's ought to enjoy a safe harbor! Very interesting Josh. I’m inclined to agree with you and Eric Goldman that the antitrust claim doesn’t have merit. More intriguing is the defamation claim. One could imagine a defamatory page ranking system in theory. But there’s no indication of any malice on Google’s part toward Kinderstart. Indeed, algorithmic ranking systems like Google’s ought to enjoy a safe harbor!

]]>