« Study indicates a significant increase in Android malware | Main | Senators propose disclosure for cyber attacks »

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Google accused of anti-competitive behavior in lawsuit

Suit Opens a Window Into Google [New York Times] 

Googlelogo In Massuchusetts, a state court is reviewing a claim by Skyhook Wireless against Google, in which Skyhook, a location-based services provider, claims that Google used its mobile OS Android to improperly squash competition.  They describe some real hardball tactics by the colossal Internet company.

Last year, Motorola had chosen Skyhook as its location services provider. According to Skyhook, Google "went crazy" after that decision by Motorola and threatened that Motorola devices may not fit the compatibility standards that devices must meet in order to operate Android. Soon the decision was reversed and Motorola switched to Google. A similar occurrence happened with a deal reached between Skyhook and Samsung that was quickly reversed in Google's favor. At the time, Google stated publicly that Skyhook was essentially bringing a baseless claim in the hopes of reversing the results of fair competition.

Recently the Skyhook case has led to some very interesting discovery – emails from within Google that illuminate some of Google's operating procedures. The court has now made these emails public.

One of the most troubling emails was from Android manager Dan Morrill stating that the compatibility requirements were being used "as a club to make [the phone makers] do things we want." Other emails paint Skyhook as a hungry start-up with a strong sales base that could hurt Google's ability to grow its own location-based services by limiting the number of devices using Google's services. These emails name the Motorola and Samsung deals directly as significant threats to Google's services. Further emails discuss working with Motorola's PR team after Skyhook issued a press release about the plotting by Google to steal Motorola. 

Many of the emails were redacted from public view, leaving much to the imagination. With the ever-increasing number of lawsuits based on email exchanges, it's interesting to look at one post that followed a long redacted section and simply said "PLEASE DO NOT! Thread-kill and talk to me off-line with any questions."

 

Posted at 11:51 PM in Broadband Internet, Public Policy |

The comments to this entry are closed.