The Social Science Research Network (SSRN) released an antitrust analysis of the proposed Google and DoubleClick, and suggested the deal would harm DoubleClick’s display ad clients.

Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick is a complicated issue, and a contentious one. The Antitrust Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee meets later this week to get a better look at the online advertising space, and as that approaches, both sides of this debate are getting testy.

Google’s proposed purchase of DoubleClick has drawn the scrutiny of privacy advocates, the Federal Trade Commission, and now a Senate Judiciary subcommittee.

Microsoft has lost its appeal of a $690 million fine as set down by the European Commission for antitrust allegations against the software giant.

A pretty large commotion was made over Google buying DoubleClick a few months back, especially from Microsoft, who filed against Google with the feds, flinging antitrust concerns. On Friday, Google responded with: Everybody else is doing it!

Big names in online advertising attracted attention in Congress, as House Representative Bobby Rush (D-IL) announced his intention to investigate antitrust implications in Google’s proposed DoubleClick acquisition.

Google’s request for extensions of some of Microsoft’s antitrust consent decree received naught but an icy rejection from the bench.

As Microsoft’s time under the watch of antitrust regulators spins to a close, Google has filed a legal request to extend that consent decree.

Google filed an antitrust complaint against Microsoft, in secret, several months ago; the complaint suggested that Vista’s desktop search function is too hard to turn off. 

Now, as you might have noticed, the complaint has become public, and several interesting details relating to the matter have also come to light.

Lobbyists work on behalf of all sorts of nasty causes – some people might not approve of oil companies and tobacco corporations, for example.  But lobbyists also work on behalf of charitable organizations and the like.  And now one more lobbyist works for Google.

The Federal Trade Commission will take a look at Google’s proposed $3.1 billion purchase of DoubleClick, and consider the antitrust ramifications of the deal.

It wasn’t too long ago that a possible Microsoft purchase of Yahoo would have spooked the living daylights out of everybody. Not anymore, not even close. Fear of Google, the FOG, rolls in so thick the folks enveloped within are looking to Microsoft for daylight.

The Google vs. MSN Rock Em Sock Em fight provides an interesting juxtaposition. In an outcome that seems surreal, like when Tyson took a bite out of Holyfield, Google has taken so much out of Microsoft in the online arena that folks are starting to wonder if it’s a fair fight.

Since Google’s surprise (and staggering) acquisition of DoubleClick, the most unlikely of trustbusters (Microsoft and AT&T) have emerged. Though their complaints may seem opportunistic and hypocritical, they may be on the money with the level of control the deal gives Google. Smaller entities are chiming in as well, suggesting it may be time to do with Google what was done with the baby bells.

The chorus of calls for antitrust review of Google’s $3.1 billion purchase of advertising network operator DoubleClick comes at a very early time in the process.

The European Commission has daily fines of $4 million in store for Microsoft, who in turn have complained that the Commission thinks "patented innovation must be made available for free

Google and Microsoft have crossed swords yet again, this time over Vista. Amidst antitrust murmurings, a Google executive urged the Redmond-based company to allow users a choice in Internet search engine. Microsoft responded in an agreeable, if vague, manner.

Microsoft will distribute vouchers valuing $37.8 million to Arkansas and $224 million to Wisconsin as part of two proposed class-action lawsuit settlements. The vouchers will be redeemable by residents of the respective states to obtain free software and hardware.

Eric Schmidt, Google’s CEO, says to call him an idiot. No, sorry, I’m the idiot here and Eric isn’t an idiot. At least not when I’ve met him.

The Austin Board of Realtors found itself on the receiving end of the Federal Trade Commission’s ire due to the FTC’s contention the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) used by the Board blocked the marketing of certain listings from the service.

If the prospect of a two-tiered Internet system proves to enhance the quality of service of certain traffic for a fee, Google plans to hammer those abusers with antitrust actions.