I understand that Google is its own legal fiction. I don't see any inherent human rights issues in turning one piece of paper into two.
I think there could be some questions as to whether Google is engaging in anti-competitive behaviour in the way they use search revenues to undercut other competitors. Perhaps they are doing nothing wrong, perhaps they are doing something wrong, and perhaps an effective remedy to that is to split the company.
Comments
Do I need to explain how a publicly traded company is still private, or are you just being purposely obtuse?
I understand that Google is its own legal fiction. I don't see any inherent human rights issues in turning one piece of paper into two.
I think there could be some questions as to whether Google is engaging in anti-competitive behaviour in the way they use search revenues to undercut other competitors. Perhaps they are doing nothing wrong, perhaps they are doing something wrong, and perhaps an effective remedy to that is to split the company.
Look at Googles multi class share structure and ask that Q again.
JHSheridan is using the term "private" to mean "not owned by the government."
Exactly. I understand there's a difference, I just thought the way I was using it was completely obvious.