The Department of Justice alleged Tuesday at the opening of the largest U.S. antitrust trial in a quarter-century that Google has used its control of the internet search industry to exclude rivals and stifle innovation.
Kenneth Dintzer, the principal attorney for the Justice Department, stated that the case “is about the future of the internet and whether Google’s search engine will ever face meaningful competition.”
Federal attorneys and state attorneys general will make an effort over the next 10 weeks to show that Google rigged the market in its favor by making its search engine the default option in a variety of locations and devices. Before the start of next year, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta probably won’t make a decision. If he finds Google in violation of the law, a second trial will be held to determine what actions should be taken to control the Mountain View, California-based business.
Top executives from Alphabet Inc., the parent company of Google, and other significant technology firms are also anticipated to testify. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, who took over for Google co-founder Larry Page four years ago, is most certainly one of them. Additionally, according to court filings, senior Apple executive Eddy Cue may be called to testify.
During the Trump administration, the Justice Department sued Google for antitrust violations, alleging that the firm had used its monopoly on internet searches to unfairly favor rivals. Government attorneys claim that Google pays billions of dollars a year to be the default search engine on the iPhone and on web browsers like Apple’s Safari and Mozilla’s Firefox in order to safeguard its brand.
Authorities assert that Google improperly skewed the market in its favor by demanding that the manufacturer of a smartphone use its Android operating system in order to have full access to the Android app store.
In particular, on phones, Dintzer added, “Google’s contracts ensure that rivals cannot match the search quality of ad monetization.” This wheel has been turning through this feedback loop for more than 12 years. Google always wins out in these situations.
Dintzer said that Google “began weaponizing defaults” more than 15 years ago, citing an internal Google paper that referred to the company’s arrangements as an “Achilles Heel” for Yahoo, MSN, and Google’s own competing search engines.
He claimed that in exchange for revenue-sharing payments, Google coerced Apple into placing its search engine as the default on their products. “This is not a negotiation,” he declared. Take it or leave it, Google is saying. He said that the firm’s anticompetitive practices barred Apple from creating its own search engine. They prevented Apple from becoming a search rival, he claimed.
Dintzer said that Google attempted to conceal some documents under the attorney-client privilege while deleting others in order to keep them out of judicial proceedings. Dintzer claimed that for years, they destroyed documents. In order to remake history in this court, “they turned history off, your honor.”
Despite controlling nearly 90% of the market for online searches, Google responds that it is up against a lot of competition. Google claims that its competitors include both search engines like Microsoft’s Bing and websites where users can ask questions about what to buy or where to go, like Amazon and Yelp.
According to Google, ongoing updates to its search engine are the reason why users almost reflexively return to it, a behavior that has long since rendered the term “Googling” synonymous with doing research online.
The trial starts just a few weeks after the company’s first investment, a $100,000 check from Andy Bechtolsheim, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, which allowed Page and Sergey Brin to launch their venture in a Silicon Valley garage.
A network of digital services centered by a search engine that processes billions of queries a day generates $224 billion in annual ad sales, which account for the majority of Alphabet’s $1.7 trillion market value and 182,000 employee count.
The antitrust complaint brought by the Justice Department is similar to the one brought against Microsoft in 1998. Just as the Internet was beginning to gain traction, regulators accused Microsoft of pressuring computer manufacturers that relied on its dominant Windows operating system to include Microsoft’s Internet Explorer as well. This bundling method effectively eliminated Netscape’s once-dominant browser competitors.
Kenneth Dintzer, the senior Justice Department litigator in the Google case, and other team members participated in the Microsoft probe.
If the trial results in concessions that weaken Google’s authority, it might be hindered. One possibility is that the business may be compelled to stop paying Apple and other businesses to have Google set as the default search engine on desktops and mobile devices.
Or Google might become distracted by the legal conflict. After Microsoft’s antitrust battle with the Justice Department, that is what transpired. Distracted, the software behemoth found it difficult to adjust to the effects of cell phones and internet searches. Google took advantage of the diversion to transform from a fledgling upstart into a formidable powerhouse.
