When the Googler in Chief takes to competitor trash talking in public, its well-honed Googley public goodwill strategy is at risk.
Google (will be) a monopoly I predicted earlier in the month.
Upon the Google announcement of its acquisition of DoubleClick Friday, I underscored: Google: $3.1 billion cash for Web monopoly!
Microsoft (irony aside) two days later said same, along with Yahoo and AT&T.
CEO Eric Schmidt retort to the National Association of Broadcasters convention yesterday on Microsoft merely showing “sour grapes” on losing to Google in the DoubleClick bidding:
Maybe they are well-practiced in their previous experience making these arguments, but it just doesn't make sense. A more likely scenario is they were unhappy because they were competitors of ours.
CEO Eric Schmidt retort on $1 billion Viacom copyright infringement lawsuit:
With Viacom, you're either doing a business deal with them, or you're being sued by them. First, we were in the former position, now we're in the latter'For them, it's just a business transaction. But it's a business I'm not familiar with.
Despite Schmidt’s bravado, Google was NOT doing business with Viacom, hence the need for Viacom to turn to the U.S. civil court system to compel Google to cease its unilateral profiteering off of copyright video content owned by others.
Schmidt is of course very familiar with business by litigation; the entire Google fair-use, DMCA fueled business model is predicated on it.
What’s more, Google has taken to the courts themselves in defense of their own monopoly like search advertising market share, over Microsoft, in seeking to dictate terms of IE7 usage.
Neverthless: Why Google will NOT rule the world!
And Why is Google afraid to buy Clear Channel?
ALSO: Google DoubleClick merger: Who wins, who loses and YouTube: Why Google is running scared and Google’s big, bad risk