The fate of online search is in the hands of Amit Mehta.
Lawyers for the Justice Department, the U.S. Attorneys General and Google have provided closing arguments in the long-running case against Google. The court has been investigating for more than a year whether the tech giant violated federal antitrust laws in order to maintain its dominance in online search. The final debate is scheduled for May 3.
The government alleges that Google played a dishonest game by paying Apple and other companies billions of dollars to install its default search engine on smartphones and browsers. Google insists that consumers use its search engine because it is really the highest quality.
In the coming weeks or months, Judge Amit P. Mehta, who is leading the trial in the District Court for the District of Columbia, will issue a verdict. It can change the way Google works, or even restructure it, or it can completely justify the tech giant. Many antitrust experts are waiting for an interim decision recognizing only some of Google's actions as unacceptable.
This process is the biggest challenge to the power of modern technology corporations, whose products are used by billions of people around the world for information, social interaction and commerce. U.S. regulators have also filed antitrust lawsuits against Apple, Amazon, and Meta* in recent years, and the decision on Google is likely to set a legal precedent for the entire industry.
"This will be the most important decision and the most significant antitrust trial of the 21st century," said Rebecca Howe Allensworth, a professor of antitrust law at Vanderbilt University School of Law. — This is the first of the major market monopolization lawsuits against major technology platforms to go to court, which makes it a litmus test of sorts."
According to the data presented at the trial, Google processes almost 90% of Internet search queries. In 2021, the company spent $26.3 billion to become the default search engine in Apple's Safari and Mozilla's Firefox browsers. $ 18 billion of this amount went to Apple.
When the Justice Department sued Google in 2020, it argued that these contracts were designed to protect the monopoly of the search business and undermine the competitiveness of companies such as Microsoft and DuckDuckGo.
A few months later, a group of state attorneys general filed their own antitrust lawsuit against Google with similar charges. Judge Mehta tried both cases together for 10 weeks last fall.
Lawyers questioned experts and executives, including the CEOs of Google and Microsoft, Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella. Nadella said that the dominance of the rival made the Internet "Google-net". He also fears that in the future Google will use similar methods to monopolize the rapidly developing artificial intelligence industry.
Once the case is over, Judge Mehta will have to determine whether Google has monopoly power over the two products involved in the case: general search engines and advertising in search results. To do this, it will assess the market share controlled by Google in these segments, as well as the opportunity for other companies to compete with it.
According to legal experts, the judge can make a compromise decision, recognizing some of the government's accusations as groundless, but ruling that some of the contracts and policies highlighted in the process are really contrary to the law.
If the decision is not in favor of Google, Mehte will also determine measures to correct its illegal practices. Perhaps the company will be required to terminate agreements with Apple and other manufacturers.
The judge can also take the example of the European Union, where in 2019 Google began offering smartphone users a choice of default search engine to comply with a previous antitrust ruling. However, many competitors complain that this measure was ineffective.
Although the government has not yet announced its requirements in case of victory, it may ask the court to make structural changes to Google's business, for example, to separate the Chrome division that helps process search queries.
"I doubt that the Justice Department will seek any form of restructuring of the company in this case," says Bill Baer, former head of the Justice Department's antitrust division. — Most likely, we will talk about introducing certain restrictions on its further activities."
Lawyers for the Justice Department, the U.S. Attorneys General and Google have provided closing arguments in the long-running case against Google. The court has been investigating for more than a year whether the tech giant violated federal antitrust laws in order to maintain its dominance in online search. The final debate is scheduled for May 3.
The government alleges that Google played a dishonest game by paying Apple and other companies billions of dollars to install its default search engine on smartphones and browsers. Google insists that consumers use its search engine because it is really the highest quality.
In the coming weeks or months, Judge Amit P. Mehta, who is leading the trial in the District Court for the District of Columbia, will issue a verdict. It can change the way Google works, or even restructure it, or it can completely justify the tech giant. Many antitrust experts are waiting for an interim decision recognizing only some of Google's actions as unacceptable.
This process is the biggest challenge to the power of modern technology corporations, whose products are used by billions of people around the world for information, social interaction and commerce. U.S. regulators have also filed antitrust lawsuits against Apple, Amazon, and Meta* in recent years, and the decision on Google is likely to set a legal precedent for the entire industry.
"This will be the most important decision and the most significant antitrust trial of the 21st century," said Rebecca Howe Allensworth, a professor of antitrust law at Vanderbilt University School of Law. — This is the first of the major market monopolization lawsuits against major technology platforms to go to court, which makes it a litmus test of sorts."
According to the data presented at the trial, Google processes almost 90% of Internet search queries. In 2021, the company spent $26.3 billion to become the default search engine in Apple's Safari and Mozilla's Firefox browsers. $ 18 billion of this amount went to Apple.
When the Justice Department sued Google in 2020, it argued that these contracts were designed to protect the monopoly of the search business and undermine the competitiveness of companies such as Microsoft and DuckDuckGo.
A few months later, a group of state attorneys general filed their own antitrust lawsuit against Google with similar charges. Judge Mehta tried both cases together for 10 weeks last fall.
Lawyers questioned experts and executives, including the CEOs of Google and Microsoft, Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella. Nadella said that the dominance of the rival made the Internet "Google-net". He also fears that in the future Google will use similar methods to monopolize the rapidly developing artificial intelligence industry.
Once the case is over, Judge Mehta will have to determine whether Google has monopoly power over the two products involved in the case: general search engines and advertising in search results. To do this, it will assess the market share controlled by Google in these segments, as well as the opportunity for other companies to compete with it.
According to legal experts, the judge can make a compromise decision, recognizing some of the government's accusations as groundless, but ruling that some of the contracts and policies highlighted in the process are really contrary to the law.
If the decision is not in favor of Google, Mehte will also determine measures to correct its illegal practices. Perhaps the company will be required to terminate agreements with Apple and other manufacturers.
The judge can also take the example of the European Union, where in 2019 Google began offering smartphone users a choice of default search engine to comply with a previous antitrust ruling. However, many competitors complain that this measure was ineffective.
Although the government has not yet announced its requirements in case of victory, it may ask the court to make structural changes to Google's business, for example, to separate the Chrome division that helps process search queries.
"I doubt that the Justice Department will seek any form of restructuring of the company in this case," says Bill Baer, former head of the Justice Department's antitrust division. — Most likely, we will talk about introducing certain restrictions on its further activities."
