Google opposed the ruling by saying that its distribution deals are just as common as other businesses in the world. The way they pay to be the default search engine in smartphones is similar to the way a food manufacturer makes payment to promote their product to be at eye level at a grocery store.
Google’s illegal act to crush its competition and maintain a monopoly on online search engine and other related advertising was ruled by the US judge. It proved to be the most significant legal ruling opposing a global technology giant in over two decades.
The federal judge stated that Google illegally monopolised advertising and online search by paying millions of dollars to companies like Samsung and Apple. They were paid to install Google as the default search engine on web browsers and smartphones.
Google took advantage of its dominance in the search market by monopolising search queries. This throttled competition and harmed the consumers. It is one of several cases filed against large technology companies by US antitrust authorities in an attempt to enhance industry competition.
Amit P Mehta, the US District Judge stated in the 286 page decision that Google owes much of its more than $300 billion in annual revenue to search ads. “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Mehta wrote.
In 2020 the US Department of Justice sued Google over its 90% control of the online search market.
The landmark decision taken on Monday proves to be a major blow to Google’s parent company Alphabet. The Justice Department’s huge win will hence fundamentally reshape how business unfolds at Google. It could also change how we use the internet and search for information.
The antitrust charges were filed during the final weeks of the Trump administration by the Justice Department helping Donald Trump’s pledge to challenge the big tech’s runaway power. That mission has continued under the Biden administration, which has been vigorous in pursuing antitrust charges.
Following the Judge’s rule the shares of Alphabet, Google’s parent company dropped. They fell about 5% on Monday, contributing to a larger selloff in technology stocks.
If affirmed, the ruling will be a “major boost” for other antitrust claims proceeding against Google and other major internet companies such as Amazon, Apple, and Meta, according to Loyola University Chicago School of Law professor Spencer Weber Waller.
The penalties imposed on Google and Alphabet are yet unclear. The fines or the remedies will be decided in a hearing schedule in the future. One solution could result in Google losing its ability to sign device arrangements, which have helped make its search engine so popular.
The government has demanded a structural relief which in theory means the break-up of the company. In his conclusion, US District Judge Amit Mehta stated that Google had paid billions of dollars to ensure that it was the default search engine on cellphones and browsers.
“Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Judge Mehta stated in his 277-page decision.
Alphabet announced that it will file an appeal against the verdict.
Google opposed the ruling by saying that its distribution deals are just as common as other businesses in the world. The way they pay to be the default search engine in smartphones is similar to the way a food manufacturer makes payment to promote their product to be at eye level at a grocery store.
Google sees the situation in an optimistic way and says that if people do not Google they can shift the default search engine on their phones. “But people don’t switch”, Google says, because they prefer Google.
During the 10-week trial, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said that Google’s unrivalled dominance resulted in a “Google web.” Monday’s verdict follows a 10-week trial in Washington, DC, in which prosecutors accused Google of paying billions of dollars each year to Apple, Samsung, Mozilla, and others to be pre-installed as the default search engine across all platforms.
According to the US, Google regularly pays more than $10 billion (£7.8 billion) per year for that permission, allowing it to access a continual stream of user data that has helped it maintain its market dominance.