Imagine a convicted monopolist arguing that it's rivals be held to the same standard as it was. Not that is going to get much traction on this antiMS and proGoogle site.
Imagine a convicted monopolist arguing that it's rivals be held to the same standard as it was. Not that is going to get much traction on this antiMS and proGoogle site.
Also, it has a commercial interest in SOPA not passing so their opposition is to be expected for their bottomline.
If you think lobbying isn't done to enhance any company's bottomline at the expense of everyone else, then you're mistaken.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/microsoft/2007/06/09/google-reveal...
And I don't see the huge problem with the link you present - in fact I don't think I'd call it "lobbying" at all. Google had a potentially legitimate complaint in asking that the court overseeing a convicted monopolist considers a particular part of their behaviour which obviously has the potential to impact on Google. It's up to the court to decide if they're infringing or not.