• by Wendy Davis , Staff Writer @wendyndavis, March 21, 2006

This morning, just several days after disgruntled Web publisher KinderStart filed a lawsuit accusing Google of monopolistic behavior in a lawsuit, research company eMarketer released a report predicting that Google's share of paid search revenue will grow to 57 percent this year.

Of course, antitrust lawyers can likely argue for years about whether 57 percent of a market in this context constitutes a monopoly. And, even if it does, Google's rivals haven't yet accused the company of predatory practices. Indeed, it's hard to envision what that argument would look like, since Google's dominance in paid search doesn't stem from anticompetitive pricing practices. Instead, consumers use the engine because they like its results; more consumers means more paid clicks.

Regardless, the one company that has made the monopoly argument, parents' advice site KinderStart, has done so in a muddled, virtually incomprehensible manner.

KinderStart late last week sued Google because the search engine allegedly downgraded KinderStart's Page Rank rating to "0" and stopped including its site in the organic results. Google issued a pro forma response, stating the suit is without merit and it intends to fight the case.

KinderStart did not argue--at least explicitly--that courts should consider Google as something like a public utility and hold the company to a higher-than-usual standard because of its market dominance. Such an argument might be a losing one, but it would at least be food for thought.

Instead--as far as can be determined by the poorly thought-out complaint--KinderStart accused Google of using its market position in search to give KinderStart's rivals an unfair advantage. "Google," states the complaint, "used its monopoly power... to deny linking and referrals to Websites and artificially depress PageRanks of Websites."

Google's motive for doing so? The complaint doesn't say--though, at one point, the lawsuit charges that Google "has unfairly and intentionally used its position as an essential carrier to harm and eliminate horizontal competition in the aforesaid relevant markets." Still, the "relevant markets" reference appears to relate to the search market, as opposed to KinderStart's market.

Regardless, as Google grows more powerful and comes to dominate search more and more, it's probably only a matter of time until more disgruntled Web site owners decide their remedy is to litigate. And. sooner or later, courts probably are going to have to consider whether Google should be viewed as something akin to a public utility.