In a significant legal battle, U.S. DOJ prosecutors have argued that Google should be forced to divest its Chrome browser and share data and search results with competitors to dismantle its alleged monopoly on online search. The prosecutors proposals include ending its deal with Apple to be the default search engine in Safair, and, if remedies fail, selling Android, among potential solutions to address the company’s alleged monopoly abuse.
Reuters:
“Google’s unlawful behavior has deprived rivals not only of critical distribution channels but also distribution partners who could otherwise enable entry into these markets by competitors in new and innovative ways,” the DOJ and state antitrust enforcers said in a court filing, opens new tab on Wednesday.
Their proposals include ending exclusive agreements in which Google pays billions of dollars annually to Apple and other device vendors to make its search engine the default on their tablets and smartphones.
Google called the proposals staggering in a statement on Thursday.
“DOJ’s approach would result in unprecedented government overreach that would harm American consumers, developers, and small businesses – and jeopardize America’s global economic and technological leadership at precisely the moment it’s needed most,” said Alphabet Chief Legal Officer Kent Walker.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta has scheduled a trial on the proposals for April, though President-elect Donald Trump and the DOJ’s next antitrust head could step in and change course in the case.
The proposals are wide-ranging, including barring Google from re-entering the browser market for five years and insisting Google sell its Android mobile operating system if other remedies fail to restore competition. The DOJ has also requested a prohibition on Google buying or investing in search rivals, query-based artificial intelligence products or advertising technology.
MacDailyNews Take: Again, Google monopolized both the search and online advertising markets years ago when they bought politicians via myriad campaign contributions (monetary and services provided) who then pushed through approval of Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick in 2007 that never should have been rubber-stamped.
While we wish Apple wouldn’t take Google’s money because the monopolized online Search Engine + Digital Ad Network that exists today (and has for years) is bad for everyone not named Alphabet Inc., Apple certainly has the right to monetize Safari’s default search engine – until they don’t. With both companies so large, it may be — in fact, is very likely — that the deal stifles competition in the search engine field. Antitrust remedies are called for in such cases. – MacDailyNews, September 11, 2023
Google is a massive problem that simply must be addressed. There is one “Big Tech” company that is really stifling competition and for which antitrust remedies are in order: Alphabet (Google). — MacDailyNews, October 20, 2020
When one search engine has 86% [91.53% – Oct. 2023] share of the worldwide market (and Google basically isn’t even used in China), there is far, far, far too much power concentrated in one company. The whole concept of the World Wide Web is destroyed when a sole gatekeeper basically controls what gets seen, read, and heard. It’s not open, it’s completely closed and controlled.
Publishers who want to be read, for example, spend an inordinate amount of time making sure they follow Google’s dictates, nebulously sussed from Google’s secret algorithm, formatting their sites, even writing their articles a certain way, including certain words they might not choose if allowed to write freely, simply to please Google’s algorithm…
Hopefully, lawmakers can come together to figure out a way to do something to remedy the horribly uncompetitive situation in internet search. Google is, and has been for years, a perfect example of why antitrust laws exist. — MacDailyNews, July 29, 2020
With this unprecedented power, platforms have the ability to redirect into their pockets the advertising dollars that once went to newspapers and magazines. No one company should have the power to pick and choose which content reaches consumers and which doesn’t. — MacDailyNews, November 9, 2017
Imagine if your livelihood depended on one company that had not only monopolized web search (and, thereby, basically controlled how new customers find you), but also controlled the bulk of online advertising dollars which funded your business and which they could pull, simply threaten to pull, or reduce rates at any time? Now also imagine if you believe this monopolist basically stole the product of another company that is the very subject of your business? How much would you criticize the monopolist thief’s business practices?
You might guess that it would be a tough road to walk. (We’re only imagining, of course!)
That would be a good example of why monopolies are bad for everyone.
The U.S. government has utterly failed to police Google. Because the people with the power to do so currently are corrupt. Follow the money. Hopefully, the European Union will help to correct the situation.
In the meantime, stop using Google search and Google products wherever possible. Monopolies are bad for everyone. — MacDailyNews, July 14, 2016
If just 10% of our daily visitors each subscribed for $5 a month, this site would have no advertising at all (and we’d be free of Google’s SEO and other shackles).
Thank you so much to our subscribers (currently 4% of our total readers) who keep MacDailyNews running!
We are currently about 1/4th of the way to being sustainable with Substack subscriptions.
Please tell your Apple-loving friends about MacDailyNews on Substack and, if you’re currently a free subscriber, please consider $5/mo. or $50/year to keep MacDailyNews going. Just hit the subscribe button. Thank you!
No comments:
Post a Comment