Printed from

Lawyer 'doesn't know' if Google paid for iPhone search deal

updated 05:30 pm EDT, Wed September 21, 2011

Google attorney uncertain on Apple search terms

Google's representing attorney Susan Creighton in a follow-up Senate hearing was unclear on the financial incentives Google might have given Apple to become the default search engine on the iPhone. Following earlier testimony by Eric Schmidt, she acknowledged that Google had made a deal with Apple but that she 'didn't know' if it involved paying Apple to choose one over the other. She admitted that it "wouldn't surprise" her if cash had traded hands.

As a defense, she emphasized that the deal was for the default engine, not the exclusive. It would take "20 seconds" to either download an app or change the default, Creighton said. iPhone users from the start have had the option of picking Yahoo and later Bing.

The lawyer argued that it was in Google's best interests to let Apple have its choice of search engines, since it led to the best result for the user.

"We want Apple to have companies like [Microsoft's] Bing competing for the search engine," Creighton explained. "When you have that contestable market, you have a stand-in for consumers... Apple isn't going to take the worst search engine."

It's rumored, though not confirmed, that Apple was given a cash incentive to pick Google. Its soon-to-be rival in the mobile field may have offered a revenue split for search ads that could be worth $100 million or more a year. Whether or not Microsoft and Yahoo offered similar deals isn't known.

Senate hearings over Google's position were triggered in part because of its control of mobile search. While it has about two thirds of all searches, that share is estimated to climb as high as 97 percent in mobile, where Android and iOS are the primary choices for smartphones and use Google as a matter of course. Exceptions exist like Windows Phone and Microsoft's deal for Bing on the BlackBerry but are rare. Both US politicians and Korea have also been worried that Google might block deals under certain conditions.

By Electronista Staff


  1. bitwrangler

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Sep 2010


    lawyers ....

    Gee, where can I get a job that pays 6 figures to stand in front the Senate and "not know" basic details about the company I'm supposed to represent. I expect her to initiate the "Chewbaca defense" tomorrow to further throw those unsuspecting senators off GOOG's trail.

  1. lamewing

    Dedicated MacNNer

    Joined: Aug 2004


    lawyers...part deux

    My brother-in-law and two different friends are lawyers. Also, I worked as a runner for a law firm in college. I can say without a doubt that not all lawyers are professional liars.

    But about 99% of them are.

  1. JuanGuapo

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jan 2008



    = Evil

  1. 001

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Dec 2010



    You'd think that this is exactly the kind of question a corporate lawyer would have prepared for when summoned to appear before the Senate. I wonder if not preparing can be considered a form of contempt. Back in college if I showed up for a discussion period without preparing there'd be h*** to pay.

Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.


Network Headlines


Most Popular


Recent Reviews

Neurio Intelligent Home Monitor

The recently released Neurio Intelligent Home Monitor is a piece of hardware that, when integrated into a home's breaker box, monitors ...

Apple 13-inch MacBook Pro (Early 2015)

Although the new darling of the Apple MacBook line up is the all-new MacBook, Apple has given its popular 13-inch MacBook Pro with Ret ...

Seagate Wireless

It seems like no matter how much internal storage is included today's mobile devices, we, as users, will always find a way to fill the ...



Most Commented


Popular News