2. 考研
  3. GOOGLE dodged a particularly large legal bullet on January 3rd, when America’s Federal Trade Commission(FTC)announced the result

GOOGLE dodged a particularly large legal bullet on January 3rd, when America’s Federal Trade Commission(FTC)announced the result

admin2014-06-25  52
问题     GOOGLE dodged a particularly large legal bullet on January 3rd, when America’s Federal Trade Commission(FTC)announced the results of a long-running investigation into allegations that the internet giant has been abusing its dominant position in online search to promote its own businesses at the expense of rivals. Google’s competitors had hoped the FTC would put a stop to what they have labeled "search bias", which would have greatly impaired the web firm’s commercial prospects. But in the event, the commission found no evidence that Google was suppressing competition in this way.
    That is a significant victory for the company, which has long argued that it should be allowed to cross-promote services such as travel-related offerings via its search engine. The FTC ruled that Google’s "universal search" service, which prominently displays Google companies in results to shopping searches, and other tweaks to the firm’s search algorithms, could be considered as innovations that improved the experience of users. Beth Wilkinson, the lawyer, said that although Google took "aggressive actions" to gain competitive advantage over rivals, its tactics "did not violate competition law".
    In other areas, however, the firm has had to make concessions. On patents, Google has agreed to license other firms’ patents deemed essential to make popular devices such as smartphones on "fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory terms". This matters, because the web giant pocketed thousands of patents when it swallowed up Motorola Mobility. The FTC alleges that Google then broke its commitment to license essential patents on fair terms and used legal injunctions to stop some rivals from using them. Google has also agreed to allow other websites to remove pieces of their content, such as consumer reviews, from Google’s specialised search offerings in areas such as shopping, while leaving them on display in its general search service. It has also pledged to make it easier for advertisers to shift data generated by ad campaigns run on Google to other search engines.
    None of this has impressed Google’s most furious critics. For example, the deputy-general counsel of Microsoft, Google’s arch-rival in search, said it was doubtful that Google could be trusted "on the basis of non-binding assurances that it will not abuse its market position further".
    Such sour grapes are hardly surprising, but as Ms Wilkinson noted in the commission’s statement on the settlement with Google, "the FTC’s mission is to protect competition, and not individual competitors". The commission’s approach to Google’s case makes sense in a market where rapid changes in technology and shifts in the competitive landscape mean that heavy-handed regulation is likely to cause far more harm than good.
    The antitrust battle is not yet over in America, where Google’s activities are also being scrutinised by the attorneys-general of several states. But this week’s settlement will greatly strengthen Google’s hand in any future legal combat there.
To which of the following would Ms Wilkinson most likely agree?
选项 A、The comments from the deputy-general counsel of Microsoft might be reasonable.
B、Google may have hurt its rivals, but it should not be punished for that.
C、The rapid changes in the competitive market makes it impossible to protect competition.
D、Google should come up with a proposal to address the charge of search bias.
答案B
解析 威尔金森女士的观点主要集中在第二段及第五段。第二段末句援引其原话指出，尽管谷歌采取了“侵略性措施”以获得胜于其对手的竞争优势，但这些策略“并没有违背竞争法”；第五段首句指出，其认为“联邦委员会的任务是保护竞争，而不是个体竞争者”。可见，[B]选项是对这两部分内容的概括引申。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/HFK4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)