A US judge has determined that Google engaged in illegal practices to stifle competition and maintain its monopoly over online search and related advertising.
According to BBC, this landmark ruling, delivered on Monday, represents a significant setback for Alphabet, Google’s parent company, and could potentially alter the business strategies of technology giants.
The ruling follows a lawsuit filed by the US Department of Justice in 2020, accusing Google of controlling roughly 90% of the online search market.
This is one of several antitrust cases brought against major tech companies as US authorities strive to enhance competition in the sector.
This case, due to Google’s dominance in search and online advertising, has been viewed as a critical challenge to the company and its parent, Alphabet.
The penalties for Google and Alphabet will be determined in a future hearing, with the government seeking “structural relief,” which could theoretically lead to a breakup of the company.
US District Judge Amit Mehta, in his 277-page opinion, stated that Google paid billions to secure its position as the default search engine on smartphones and browsers.
“Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Judge Mehta wrote.
Alphabet plans to appeal the ruling. “This decision recognises that Google offers the best search engine, but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available,” the company stated.
US Attorney General Merrick Garland hailed the decision as a “historic win for the American people,” emphasizing that “no company – no matter how large or influential – is above the law.”
Federal antitrust regulators have also filed pending lawsuits against other Big Tech firms, including Meta Platforms, Amazon.com, and Apple Inc., accusing them of unlawful monopolies.
The ruling follows a 10-week trial in Washington DC, where prosecutors argued that Google annually spends over $10 billion to ensure it remains the default search engine on various platforms, securing user data and maintaining market dominance.
This strategy, prosecutors said, hinders other companies from competing effectively.
Department of Justice lawyer Kenneth Dintzer argued that Google’s extensive payments underscore the value of being the default search engine.
Google’s search engine generates substantial revenue, largely from advertising on its results pages.
Google’s defense, led by lawyer John Schmidtlein, maintained that users prefer Google because of its superior service and ongoing investments to improve the user experience.
Schmidtlein also contended that Google faces substantial competition from general search engines like Microsoft’s Bing, as well as specialized sites and apps.
Judge Mehta’s ruling highlighted the strategic importance of being the default search engine, noting that new entrants would need to pay billions in revenue share to compete.
In addition to this case, another lawsuit concerning Google’s advertising technology is set for trial in September. In Europe, Google has faced substantial fines in similar monopoly cases.
