A federal judge appointed by former President Barack Hussein Obama found that Google has broken federal antitrust laws to cement its dominance over advertising space and searches.
This from therightscoop.com.
Here is the report from Fox Business:
A federal judge ruled on Monday that Alphabet—the parent company of tech giant Google—broke federal antitrust laws as it reinforced its dominant position over online searches and advertising.
The ruling from U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in the District of Columbia opens the door to a second trial to determine potential remedies to Google’s monopolization of the search and advertising space. It marks the Justice Department’s first victory over a monopoly in over 20 years.
The decision is the first major court ruling against Big Tech firms in a series of cases alleging that those companies have allegedly engaged in monopolistic business practices.
Many hope this was the first step of the breaking up of Google after the way the giant has treated conservative websites. Google acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in online search, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled on Monday in a landmark decision that strikes at the power of tech giants in the modern internet era and that may fundamentally alter the way they do business.
From the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, the 277-page ruling stated Google had abused a monopoly over the search business. The Justice Department and states had sued Google, accusing it of illegally cementing its dominance, in part, by paying other companies, like Apple and Samsung, billions of dollars a year to have Google automatically handle search queries on their smartphones and web browsers.
The world has used Google by default for years, but now?
Judge Mehta said in his ruling:
Google is a monopolist,
and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.
The ruling “is a verdict on the rise of giant technology companies that have used their roots in the internet to influence the way we shop, consume information, and search online”—and indicates a potential limit of Big Tech’s power.
The ruling is likely to influence other government antitrust lawsuits against Google, Apple, Amazon, and Meta, the owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp.
The last significant antitrust ruling against a tech company targeted Microsoft more than two decades ago.
Judge Mehta’s decision is expected to trigger a separate proceeding to determine what penalties Google will face after which point the company is also likely to file an appeal, meaning any potential consequences may take months or even years to play out.
The ruling, however, could ultimately upend how Google makes its search engine available to users, by impacting its ability to make the pricey deals with device makers and online service providers that were at the heart of the case.
Other remedies could be on the table, too.
Vanderbilt University law professor Rebecca Allensworth stated:
[T]he court could force Google to implement a ‘choice screen’ letting users know about other available search engines.
Further:
The company is also likely to face a monetary fine, although fines are not the primary way in which the American antitrust system enforces the law, because they tend to be a drop in the bucket for a huge, very profitable company like Google.
At the time the lawsuit was first filed, U.S. antitrust officials also did not rule out the possibility of a Google breakup, warning that Google’s behavior could threaten future innovation or the rise of a Google successor.
The ruling could also be a bellwether for other, major tech antitrust cases that are moving through the courts, including against Apple and Amazon. Both Amazon and Apple have called the antitrust lawsuits filed against them ‘wrong on the facts and the law.’
Artificial intelligence was one concern at trial also. Some critics warned that Google’s search monopoly, which is fed by a never-ending supply of user search queries, would allow it to leapfrog to a dominant position in artificial intelligence.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said from the witness stand:
The enormous amount of search data that is provided to Google through its default agreements can help Google train its artificial intelligence models to be better than anyone else’s—threatening to give Google an unassailable advantage in AI that would further entrench its power.
Nadella’s testimony highlighted how the government’s case may have far-reaching effects that go beyond traditional search and may shape the future of a technology world leaders have described as potentially transformational.
Emarketer senior analyst Evelyn Mitchell-Wolf said in an emailed statement:
If the court takes away Google’s agreements that make it the default search engine on so many devices, it could hurt the company’s core product at an extremely pivotal moment.
Further, referring to the growing threat to Google’s search dominance posed by artificial intelligence search tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT:
Its ubiquity is its biggest strength, especially as competition heats up among AI-powered search alternatives.
