If you do a Google Maps search from a mobile device and find walking instructions, there is a tile below the options that says "Get an Uber", comparing the time it will take for a user to walk vs. take an Uber.<p>Google has a dominant position in the maps app market and Uber is a company they've invested in. Is it legal for them to leverage their monopoly in this area to exclusively promote one of their portfolio companies?<p>At a minimum it seems like they should be offering all rideshare apps the ability to be featured in this space and let them buy it like any other ad space Google sells.<p>I'm thinking about this because of the recent expose of Uber's aggressive and potentially illegal tactics to undermine Lyft. I haven't heard anyone talk about this particular issue--Google potentially using its monopoly power to tilt the market in favor of one of its portfolio companies.
<i>Google has a dominant position in the maps app market and Uber is a company they've invested in. Is it legal for them to leverage their monopoly in this area to exclusively promote one of their portfolio companies?</i><p>It appears legal:<p><i>The Federal Trade Commission said Thursday it wouldn't bring charges against Google after a 19-month investigation into whether the company favored its own products and services in its search results and unfairly harmed rivals.</i><p>[1] <a href="http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323874204578219592520327884" rel="nofollow">http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142412788732387420...</a>
One thing to keep in mind is that Google only suggests getting an Uber if the user already has the Uber app installed on their device. So while this integration does give Uber an advantage in getting more rides, it doesn't help Uber get new riders. Not sure if this affects the post's argument or not.
Issues like this against Google are crazy and just wrong. What is wrong with a company pushing its own (or invested in) products (similarly: the EU requiring Google to not favor its own services when conducting a search)? If you do not like it, than use a different service; the benefit of the free market.<p>Sorry if that was a bit of a rant: illegal no.
Couldn't you similarly ask if they have to include Facebook, Twitter and others where they currently have Google+ integration?<p>Seems like it's their choice to integrate whatever they want, outside of some antitrust violation.