Google stands up for its search business in the most significant US antitrust case of the century thus far

Google stands up for its search business in the most significant US antitrust case of the century thus far

The largest​ antitrust action ​since the turn-of-the-century Microsoft‌ case ‍is headed​ to trial today, as the federal government and a group of state attorneys general⁢ challenge⁢ Google’s dominance in⁤ search.

Google is specifically accused ⁣of creating⁤ a⁤ monopoly through the use of exclusivity contracts with device manufacturers⁢ and software providers — deals, in short, that make Google the default search engine for ‌a ⁢given‍ device ​or platform. The overall​ effect of those numerous deals, according to the government’s complaint, has been ⁢to artificially deny access to the ​search engine market to rivals, creating an effective monopoly.

The ⁤complaint, which was filed in October 2020 ⁤in the federal​ district court in Washington, D.C., further alleged that the exclusive⁤ contracts were used not just to broaden the use of its products, but to⁤ explicitly​ exclude competitors from chipping away at Google’s dominant market⁤ share in search.

“To preserve its dominance, Google has developed economic‍ models to‌ measure the ‘defensive value’ of foreclosing⁢ search rivals from ‌effective distribution,‍ search access points, and ultimately‌ competition,” the government​ stated. “In sum, Google, deprives rivals ⁣of ​the quality reach, and financial position necessary to mount any meaningful competition to Google’s longstanding monopolies.”

What to expect in ⁤the ⁤Google antitrust case

To prove its case, the Department of Justice (DOJ) is likely to‌ call ‍witnesses from⁢ Google’s competitors, which is ​a common, well-worn technique⁢ in antitrust actions, according to David ​Olson, an associate⁢ professor at Boston College Law School.

“They’ll ⁤likely complain that the default placement⁣ of Google and the⁢ lock-in​ effect‍ of ⁤that really hurt them,” he said. “And well, yeah, they don’t like Google, they’re competitors, so you have to take that with a ⁤grain of salt.”

The​ government, however, ‍does have more potential ⁣sources of harmful testimony to Google —⁢ including Google itself, which may have made internal statements⁢ confirming the type⁤ of⁤ anticompetitive behavior‌ covered by the ⁢lawsuit.

“When I teach antitrust, I tell ‍students that ‌the⁣ place you⁣ want to go for discovery is ‍the sales and marketing people,” Olson said. “Sales​ and ​marketing‌ people have a ‌tough job, and they’re very rah-rah ‍and they have ‍to, you know, hype themselves⁢ up — so they ​will say things that sound terrible to an antitrust lawyer.”

Hance, the government can be expected to ⁤produce ⁣internal documents from Google that it will argue are “very damaging,” according to Olson.

What happens⁣ if the ‍government wins against Google?

Surprisingly, nothing earthshaking will ⁢happen⁢ to Google itself‍ if the government’s action succeeds, according to Vanderbilt University Law School​ associate dean Rebecca Haw Allensworth.

“This is a lawsuit⁣ against the use of these contracts, and the logical‍ remedy is ⁣just ‘You can’t ‌do these kinds of…

2023-09-12 19:24:02
Link ‌from www.computerworld.com rnrn

Exit mobile version