Is YouTube the significant part of the web you are referring to? Are you sure search boxes in sites really require you to find YouTube videos?

There are multiple distinct issues. But they're all about Google specifically blocking MS to provide competition via their monopoly position.

If Google wants to give up some of their marketshare, I'm sure no one will complain. But when you have monopoly status, you are required to play by different rules. MS knows something about that (for example almost everything MS did in the antitrust case would be legal of a company w/o the market influence they had).

It's difficult to see their point (besides making headlines, that is). Are the sites willing to go with Bing search but blocked because they want AdSense ads too? The solution is simple - and easy given Microsoft's huge reserves: make AdCenter pay more than AdSense and make it every bit as easy to set up. Make a solution for advertisers that allows them to "suck the life out" of their AdSense accounts.

Hard to do? Of course it is! Do they want the government to step in to mandate all problems be easy to solve?

Well how about for starters, Google not placing legal restrictions on interoperability.

Google is even restricting its customers’—namely, advertisers’—access to their own data . . . Google contractually prohibits advertisers from using their data in an interoperable way with other search advertising platforms, such as Microsoft’s adCenter http://searchengineland.com/microsoft-comes-out-of-shadows-w...

And here's "Do No Evil" Google's action in the Skyhook case: Skyhook and Google are competitors in the location positioning space. There was a time when Google tried to compete fairly with Skyhook. But once Google realized its positioning technology was not competitive, it chose other means to undermine Skyhook and damage and attempt to destroy its position in the marketplace for location positioning technology. In complete disregard of its common-law and statutory obligations, and in direct opposition to its public messaging encouraging open innovation, Google wielded its control over the Android operating system, as well as other Google mobile applications such as Google Maps, to force device manufacturers to use its technology rather than that of Skyhook, to terminate contractual obligations with Skyhook, and to otherwise force device manufacturers to sacrifice superior end user experience with Skyhook by threatening directly or indirectly to deny timely and equal access to evolving versions of the Android operating system and other Google mobile applications.

I know in your world Google can do no wrong, but trust me, they do.

Google can do wrong and, if they are doing something wrong, they should be restricted from doing so.

And so should Microsoft. If these claims end up being frivolous and this whole thing just a stunt to produce lots of headlines with "Google", "Monopoly" and "Antitrust" in them, Microsoft should also be on the receiving end of a probe about anti-competitive practices.

Hopefully, one that can do what the previous ones couldn't.