Google Antitrust Hearing Witness List

And FairSearch's "Fact Sheet"

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:

[ Search]

We got an email today from the FairSearch Coalition with a witness list for Google’s upcoming hearing with the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, competition policy and consumer rights.

The hearing takes place on Wednesday, September 21 at 2:00 p.m. The witness list is as follows:

Panel I

Eric Schmidt
Executive Chairman
Google Inc.
Mountain View, CA
Panel II

Jeff Katz
Chief Executive Officer
Nextag, Inc.
San Mateo, CA
Jeremy Stoppelman
Co-founder and Chief Executive Officer
Yelp, Inc.
San Francisco, CA
Thomas O. Barnett
Covington & Burling LLP
Washington, DC
Susan A. Creighton
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, PC
Washington, DC

FairSearch also attached what it calls it refers to as a “Fact Sheet”:

Fair Search Fact Sheet
Fair Search Fact Sheet

They also put together a list of Google quotes here.

FairSearch, as you may know, was formed mainly to see Google’s acquisition of ITA Software blocked. It’s made up mainly of competing travel sites. Google actually just launched Flight Search this week, based on ITA technology.

While the coalition was unable to see the acquisition blocked it still continues to fight Google on competition policy.

It should be quite interesting to learn the results of the hearing.

Google Antitrust Hearing Witness List
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • http://www.saudien7raf.com:2011 saudien7raf
  • Marian

    Problem we have is that Google stopped fighting spam all together as they think that by bringing Places, Sopping, Brands instead of shops in the natural rankings would solve the spam. I have not seen in my life such ignorance to paid links: The new form in the spam report asks who is selling links and who is buying. The buyer gets in general hundreds if not thousands of links with interest in manipulating anchor text but Google form alows you to put one site only. Is this a joke what interest do they have in discounting paid links? None. I have the feeling Google is trying to push webmasters doing wrong things and make all look spammers.

    Not happy.


  • http://www.norele.com Richard

    I was able to watch some of the congressional hearing. Interesting that Google would force smaller internet players to give up product or web content or get blocked from Google search results. (look up the testimony/transcripts of Yelp CEO.) Is that web blackmail? Have the no shame or is it a question of they can do no wrong in some people’s eyes? Good one is the news portion of Google losing a European lawsuit where any further violations would result in a $25,000 judgement per infraction. My own experience is that I tried to submit my search website, www.norele.com for the library help that Google has, only to find out that no new sites were being accepted, two months before fall school started. I don’t know if that is an attempt to keep me out, or that the corporate level people had to have more lead time to add a website for students. My guess is keeping new websites out. So, how much can a giant company do before somebody says “enough?”

  • Join for Access to Our Exclusive Web Tools
  • Sidebar Top
  • Sidebar Middle
  • Sign Up For The Free Newsletter
  • Sidebar Bottom