Google and Yahoo! – Marriage Plans Cancelled…

10 November 2008 Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog Blog
Authors: Peter Vogel

The saga of where Yahoo! is headed took another turn when Google decided that it was not worth the federal scrutiny for Google and Yahoo! to work together. Clearly to the two largest search engines working together meant an increase in revenue for Yahoo! Microsoft a spurned suitor made it clear that it did not want Google and Yahoo! working together. As well, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been reviewing this joint marriage since it was first announced.

How Did the Elections Impact the Cancellation?

Google’s decision to abandon the Yahoo! deal happened a few days after the election. However, Google CEO’s Eric Schmidt campaigned for President-Elect Obama, so one might have concluded that Google would have continued with this deal. In an unrelated event Thomas Barnett, Assistant AG for the Antitrust division of the DOJ, who was skeptical of the Google deal, resigned the day following Google’s decision to abandon the Yahoo! deal. What’s the message here?

What’s Going to Happen Now?

All indications are that Yahoo! has to do something for economical survival and maybe a new deal with Microsoft will be more appealing since the deal with Google ended. Google is the 800 pound gorilla in the search/ad business and everything it does to expand will continue to anticompetitive scrutiny, not unlike virtually every move that Microsoft makes leaves it subject to court scrutiny. However a deal between Microsoft and Yahoo! is anything but a sure thing since the DOJ will want to scrutinize any proposal that may be anticompetitive. As a matter of fact, a DC District Judge still gets reports about Microsoft’s compliance with the 2001 Antitrust Settlement.
 

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Authors

Related Services

Insights

Lacktman, Ferrante Cited in mHealth Intelligence About Ryan Haight Act
19 September 2019
mHealth Intelligence
Tinnen Discusses How Viewpoint Diversity Helps Businesses Thrive
18 September 2019
InsideTrack
Vernaglia Comments on AHA v Azar Decision
18 September 2019
MedPage Today
Lach Comments on Launch of New Group
16 September 2019
BizTimes Milwaukee
MedTech Impact Expo & Conference
13-15 December 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
BRG Healthcare Leadership Conference
06 December 2019
Washington, D.C.
CTeL Telehealth Fall Summit 2019
04-06 December 2019
Washington, D.C.