In 1998, the U.S. Department of Justice and 20 state attorneys general sued Microsoft for using its exponentially amassed power to snuff out browser company Netscape and other competitive threats.

Gary Reback, now an attorney with Carr & Ferrell in Menlo Park, California, represented Netscape at the time and helped the government build its lawsuit against the tech pioneer. A 1997 Wired cover story declared Reback as “maybe the only man Bill Gates feared.” The three-year United States v. Microsoft litigation ended with DOJ allowing Microsoft to remain intact and the company agreeing to a set of rules limiting its monopoly and retaliation power.

Since that fateful settlement, Reback has represented clients in the U.S. and Europe who have complained about Google's anti-competitive tactics. Now, as trustbusters descend on Silicon Valley from home and abroad once again, Reback shares what has changed, and more importantly, what hasn't, as rumors of antitrust action against companies such as Facebook, Apple, Amazon and Google swirl in Washington.

Answers have been edited for length and clarity.

How does the Microsoft decision relate to our current antitrust climate? Google's conduct, under the Microsoft case, falls within what was considered illegal. In 2011, the Federal Trade Commission opened an investigation into Google's alleged search manipulation. Two years later, the agency closed the investigation, exonerating Google and shutting down other investigations into Google's conduct.