Foundem claims the penalties were imposed, it was unclear whether web crawlers crawled beyond the main page of a website using iframe tags without some extra modifications. The former SEO director OMD UK, Jaamit Durrani, among others, offered this alternative explanation, stating that “Two of the major issues that Foundem had in summer was content in iFrames and content requiring javascript to load – both of which I looked at in August, and they were definitely in place. Both are huge barriers to search visibility in my book. They have been fixed somewhere between then and the lifting of the supposed ‘penalty’. I don't think that's a coincidence.” Most of Foundem’s accusations claim that Google deliberately applies penalties to other vertical search engines because they represent competition. Foundem is backed by a Microsoft proxy group, the 'Initiative for Competitive Online Marketplace'. The Foundem’s case chronology The following table details Foundem's chronology of events as found on their website: Other cases Google's large market share (85%) has made them a target for search neutrality litigation via antitrust laws. In February 2010, Google released an article on the Google Public Policy blog expressing their concern for fair competition, when other companies at the UK joined Foundem's cause (eJustice.fr, and Microsoft's Ciao! from Bing) also claiming being unfairly penalized by Google. The FTC’s Investigation into Allegations of Search Bias After two years of looking into claims that Google “manipulated its search algorithms to harm vertical websites and unfairly promote its own competing vertical properties,” the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted unanimously to end the antitrust portion of its investigation without filing a formal complaint against Google. The FTC concluded that Google's “practice of favoring its own content in the presentation of search results” did not violate U.S. antitrust laws. The FTC further determined that even though competitors might be negatively impacted by Google's changing algorithms, Google did not change its algorithms to hurt competitors, but as a product improvement to benefit consumers. Arguments There are a number of arguments for and against search neutrality. Pros Those who advocate search neutrality argue that the results would not be biased towards sites with more advertising, but towards sites most relevant to the user. Search neutrality encourages sites to have more quality content rather than pay to rank higher on organic results. Restrains search engines from only supporting their best advertisers. Search engines would allow traffic