ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Truth on the Market

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate & Securities Law

: Truth on the Market

EU Clears Google-Doubleclick

ADVERTISEMENTS

From the WSJ Online:

The transaction had faced stiff opposition in Brussels from Google rivals including Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc., as well as privacy advocates who fretted that a combined company would control a vast storehouse of data on Web users and their surfing habits. But European Commission antitrust officials early on ruled out examining the privacy implications of the deal, resulting in a conventional merger analysis that left fewer ways for the deal to be blocked. In the end, the EU concluded that the still-nascent online-advertising market is changing quickly enough and has enough competitors that a combined Google-DoubleClick wouldn’t be able to shut out rivals. The purchase “would be unlikely to have harmful effects on consumers,” the EU said in a statement. The EU’s approval had been expected. The U.S. Federal Trade Commission gave its blessing, in a 4-1 vote, in December.

UPDATE: Here is more from Google’s Eric Schmidt and a few excerpts from the EC’s Press Release:

The Commission’s in-depth market investigation found that Google and DoubleClick were not exerting major competitive constraints on each other’s activities and could, therefore, not be considered as competitors at the moment. Even if DoubleClick could become an effective competitor in online intermediation services, it is likely that other competitors would continue to exert sufficient competitive pressure after the merger. The Commission therefore concluded that the elimination of DoubleClick as a potential competitor would not have an adverse impact on competition in the online intermediation advertising services market.

And with respect to non-horizontal issues the Commission:

found that the merged entity would not have the ability to engage in strategies aimed at marginalising Google’s competitors, mainly because of the presence of credible ad serving alternatives to which customers (publishers/advertisers/ad networks) can switch, in particular vertically integrated companies such as Microsoft, Yahoo! and AOL. The market investigation also found that the merged entity would not have the incentive to close off access for competitors in the ad serving market, mainly because such strategies would be unlikely to be profitable.

 

 

Full post as published by Truth on the Market on March 11, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0136 secs (new cache)