Kinderstart (www.kinderstart.com) is a searchable website that provide information about parenting and child care. It is similar to Google (www.google.com), a big search engine. According to market research published by comScore in November 2009, Google Search is the dominant search engine in the United States market. Google indexes billions of web pages, so that users can search for the information they desire through the use of keywords and operators. But, Kinderstart is specifically focused on resources for young children. For instance, if someone want to search about family (adoption, pregnancy, baby), child development, food and nutrition, sport, travel, and health information. At one point, Kinderstart was “one of the choicest internet destinations for thousands of parents, caregivers, educators, and federal, state, and local organization. The monthly
…show more content…
The Judge wrote in his decision that, "Kinderstart has failed to allege any conduct on the part of Google that significantly threatens or harms competition." On Google case, the court concluded in its July 13th Order that Kinderstart had failed to allege facts sufficient to support each of the four elements of an attempted monopolization and had not sufficiently described the markets relevant to its claim. The Court dismissed the defamation and libel claim in the FAC (“First Amended Complaint”) on the basis that Kinderstart had failed to explain how Google caused injury to it by a provably false statement about the output of Google’s algorithm regarding KinderStart.com, as distinguished from an unfavorable opinion about Kinderstart’s importance. At the end, based on Google case, the judges stat in IV. ORDER, “(1) The motion to Dismiss is GRANTED without leave to amend. (2) The special motion is DENIED.
The Judge wrote in his decision that, "Kinderstart has failed to allege any conduct on the part of Google that significantly threatens or harms competition." On Google case, the court concluded in its July 13th Order that Kinderstart had failed to allege facts sufficient to support each of the four elements of an attempted monopolization and had not sufficiently described the markets relevant to its claim. The Court dismissed the defamation and libel claim in the FAC (“First Amended Complaint”) on the basis that Kinderstart had failed to explain how Google caused injury to it by a provably false statement about the output of Google’s algorithm regarding KinderStart.com, as distinguished from an unfavorable opinion about Kinderstart’s importance. At the end, based on Google case, the judges stat in IV. ORDER, “(1) The motion to Dismiss is GRANTED without leave to amend. (2) The special motion is DENIED.