You can read the full article here.
If you want my opinion on whether Google is actually guilty of anti-trust whateverness, my opinion is no. Microsoft, when it got hit with its anti trust lawsuit back in the 90s, was guilty. Why? They controlled the computer OS market, with 90% of machines running Windows. So they put software on their that users couldn't choose. So when you got a computer, you had to use Internet Explorer. Because that was all that was installed on the computer.
The inefficiency of IE6 and IE7 are direct results of the lack of competition back in the 90s for IE 5, IE 5.5 and IE6.
So why is Google not guilty? Because there is a huge difference between being forced to use IE, and choosing to use IE because its vastly superior to all competing products (its not, but for the sake of the analogy I said it).
Its the same with Google. Sure I could search with Yahoo. Or Ask.com. Or Microsoft's search (what is it, live something?). But each time I choose to use Google because its the superior search engine. Its faster, its more reliable. It delivers more accurate results, with the information I need usually in the top three results.
So thats why I think Google isn't guilty of anti-trust. Aside from that, Google has been very consistent in making sure that all their products are easy to start using and easy to leave. Gmail, for example, allows contacts to be exported/imported (a feature lacking in competitors like Hotmail, Yahoo Mail), e-mail forwarding, POP access, and other features which are lacking in the free versions of many of Gmail's competitors.
If only the new Obama-DOJ saw things my way.
I agree...good points!!