Kinderstart.com’s Complaint Fails to Meet the Grade

Kinderstart.com’s complaint against Google, Inc. for monopolistic practices and unfair competition failed to meet the grade, a trial court has ruled.

Kinderstart.com sued Google for attempted monopolization, unfair competition and defamation and libel after the portal was blocked by Google’s page rank. Kinderstart said in 2000 it was “one of the choicest Internet destinations for thousands of parents, caregivers, educators, nonprofit and advocate representatives . . . to access vital information about infants and toddlers.”

Kinderstart.com said in 2003 it enrolled in Google’s AdSense Program and paid for a series of paid links from Google. However, in March 2005, it “suffered a cataclysmic fall of 70% or more in its monthly page views and traffic,” apparently was a result of the fact that Google no longer listed KSC.com in its search results.

Kinderstart complained that Google engaged in “pervasive monopolistic practices” that led to the denial of Kinderstart’s free speech rights, destruction of competition and predatory pricing by monitoring, manipulating and censoring the output and content on the Results Page.

Google filed a motion to strike the complaint and the court agreed but allowed Kinderstart to file an amended complaint. As to the allegation that blockage and Page Rank devaluation caused injury to Kinderstart in the form of lost traffic and revenue, the court said “the facts alleged are insufficient to show that Kinderstart has suffered an antitrust injury-the result of anti-competitive conduct.”

While Kinderstart argued that Google maintains monopoly power in the Search Ad market by pressuring websites to purchase advertising in order to avoid decreased Page Rank scores and removal from the Results Page, the court said. “Kinderstart provides no specifics as to how Google creates this pressure” and the allegation is insufficient to state an antitrust cause of action.

Concerning the action for libel based upon Google’s Page Rank of “0” for Kinderstart.com, Google argued that Page Rank is an opinion, not a factual statement. Opinions cannot be a basis for libel. The court said “it is possible a Page Rank reasonably could be interpreted as a factual statement insofar as it purports to tell a user ‘how Google’s algorithms assess the importance of the page you’re viewing.'” As such, it could be the basis for a libel claim, but Kinderstart failed to show that the statement caused injury to it.

Kinderstart.com LLC v. Google, Inc., N.D. Calif., San Jose Division, No. 06 C 2057, filed July 13, 2006.