> What do you mean there is "no clear antitrust issue" here? Most of OP's contacts use gmail, but gmail refuses his legitimate outside mail.
But Google does accept almost everybody else's email, including many actual commercial competitors, and there is no reason to believe anyone at Google is deliberating singling OP out or even knows who OP is, so I can't imagine where you're seeing anticompetitive behavior.
> Since email is an open protocol, and since his mail server is easy to verify and sends no spam (as he outlines at long length in his blog post), this really is quite blatant. Imagine if, early in the millennium, Internet Explorer refused to connect over http with servers that weren't IIS.
This is more like if Internet Explorer failed to connect to some random Joe's homebrew personal server but could connect to most other people's just fine whether or not they were using IIS. That's not anticompetitive behavior, it's just a bug, and in fact there were many things that Internet Explorer did not handle correctly.
Your antitrust case hinges on the fact that a random commenter on a blog suggested their personal folk remedy of signing up for Google Apps. I would love to see an antitrust that has been lost over less.
Again, Google accepts email from a huge number of sources, including major competitors, of which the OP is not one. Many people here even report running their own mail servers and experiencing success sending to Gmail. What kind of anticompetitive behavior is that? There is no indication that this is anything more than a bug.
>there is no reason to believe anyone at Google is deliberating singling OP out or even knows who OP is, so I can't imagine where you're seeing anticompetitive behavior //
If all small scale email providers get blocked then that's surely anti-competitive. It doesn't require them to have specifically blocked his server for them to be acting anti-competitively.
If the only practical way to get your [non-spam] email passed on to a person who uses gmail is to move away from your [non-spamming] email provider that's also anti-competitive IMO.
