I disagree with your point of view (which sounds to me like Adam Smith-style classical liberalism) but it would take too long to explain why. The nutshell is that you're still advocating capitalist means for socialist ends -- e.g. that the government should encourage competition as a social good, that new innovations are a limited resource unfairly seized by entrepreneurs, etc.

I think that yours is a reasonable point of view but I do still think it's in error and that it would lead to massive rights violations in practice. E.g. how would the Google subdivisions be forced to compete if Page and Brin still owned a controlling stake of each?

Have a read of this if you want an alternative point of view (yes, I'm a randroid). http://itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/bhobbs/Capitalism-The%20Unknow...