Hacker News Reader

Comment by tss | Hacker News Reader

If they don't get the issue of Knol pagerank sorted out soon, they are going to be hit with a massive anti trust lawsuit. And they are going to lose.

I'm curious as to why everyone is so surprised that this is happening though. It already worked like this with blogs hosted through Blogspot and websites hosted through Google Pages.

View on HN

If they don't get the issue of Knol pagerank sorted out soon, they are going to be hit with a massive anti trust lawsuit. And they are going to lose.

I certainly hope not. Google, as a private company, should be free to display whatever they want in the search results. Once we start litigating and mandating search placement it becomes a no-win situation. If site A is placed above site B, site B sues. If site B is above site A, site A sues.

There is certainly solid legal ground for arguing that Google giving preferential search results to itself is an anticompetitive practice. It would be different if Google didn't control the vast majority of the search market, but it does.

Let's say there is a phone book company that pretty much controls the entire market. Google's actions are akin to the phonebook company only listing businesses that it owns in the main pages, while listing everything else in an appendix. Anticompetitive practice, to be sure. The phonebook company might argue, "Well since we are so tightly integrated with out own businesses, it is much easier to index them. Our competitors ending up in the back is simply an unintended side effect". Possibly true, but it's not going to fly in court.

To be honest, I don't care if Google is giving preferential treatment to Knol. But please, establish some plausible deniability. The speed in which Knol is being indexed is far too obvious. I think it would be a damn shame if Google were to lose its hold on the search market because of a lawsuit.

Google Maps is also integrated into the Google search. Any time it detects that you've entered a mappable location it provides a Google Maps link. If this feature were removed by, say, a lawsuit by Mapquest I think that Google would become less effective, and everyone would suffer as a result.

That's just my personal opinion, however. I had (and still have) no objection to Microsoft bundling a web browser and media player in Windows, and yet they've been hit by antitrust charges.

Maybe Microsoft would have been let off if their web browser and media player weren't such terrible products.

This is certainly much less significant then giving preferential page rank. Google controls what over two thirds of people see through search. If it doesn't appear on the first 3 pages of a Google search, exposure is very limited.

It's a shame that my original comment got voted down (didn't even know you could do that). I'd rather people share their opinions rather then voting down; the topic is worthy of discussion.

I really don't mind bundled software either. In fact, I don't mind preferential treatment being given to Knol. What I do mind is Google opening itself up to a lawsuit. A significant lawsuit against Google would have large negative effects in my opinion. I'd just like Google to show a little bit more discretion.

Problem is that Google's not artificially proppingp those blogs and they're not hosting ads by default and collecting revenue from them. Also, when you create a blog, you own the content.. not so with Knol.

That's incorrect... Terms of service states...

5.1. No Google Ownership of User Content. Google claims no ownership or control over any content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through the Service. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any content you submit, post or display on or through the Service and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com