47 votes

Google violated antitrust laws in online search, US judge rules

Posted by UNO
Tags: google.search, internet, usa, search engines, antitrust, legal, lawsuits, monopolies, business, department of justice, judges, rulings, author.david mccabe, source.the new york times, paywall
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/technology/google-antitrust-ruling.html

Link information

This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.

Title
'Google Is a Monopolist,' Judge Rules in Landmark Antitrust Case
Published
Aug 5 2024
Word count
1481 words

7 comments

  1. [4]
    UNO
    (edited )
    Link
    I wander what will happen to Mozilla since they are mention in the ruling and while true that Google pays them to be the default, isn’t Google their biggest source of revenue? Or has that change ?...

    Judge Amit P. Mehta of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia said 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.

    “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Judge Mehta said in his ruling.

    I wander what will happen to Mozilla since they are mention in the ruling and while true that Google pays them to be the default, isn’t Google their biggest source of revenue? Or has that change ? Because if not and Google is force to stop the payments I don’t see them surviving.

    13 votes
    1. [3]
      vord
      (edited )
      Link Parent
      Mozilla's deals at least predate total Google dominance a bit, starting almost 20 years ago. The others, especially Apple's seems especially sus. They might be able to avoid getting fully struck...

      Mozilla's deals at least predate total Google dominance a bit, starting almost 20 years ago. The others, especially Apple's seems especially sus. They might be able to avoid getting fully struck down for that reason.

      Also part of the issue is that Google is using that search dominance to force its way into new markets. Chrome became Chrome because Google advertised it on the front page for decades. This used to be a gold standard for antitrust, before Microsoft got convicted and then got away with a slap on the wrist, enabling the giant tech oligopolies of today.

      Microsoft should have been properly sliced up in the 90s, and it would have prevented this nasty Amazon/Google/Microsoft/Apple/Oracle/Facebook problem quite nicely. Rather than trying to constantly gobble up all of all tech sectors, businesses would have been much more likely to remain profitable within their niche.

      If Google Search were forced to be fully split off from the rest of Google, it would certainly bust open the market, particularly if there was say a decade-long ban from GoogleSearch from using say GoogleAds.

      That said, Mozilla desperately needs more diversified funding.

      19 votes
      1. UNO
        Link Parent
        Yeah the Apple and Samsung ones are definitely more problematic, I’m just concerned about Mozilla since FF is my desktop browser of choice. Would use it on mobile too but I use iOS.

        Yeah the Apple and Samsung ones are definitely more problematic, I’m just concerned about Mozilla since FF is my desktop browser of choice. Would use it on mobile too but I use iOS.

        7 votes
      2. RobotOverlord525
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        That certainly would have been ideal. I would like to see a lot of these giant tech companies broken up. Particularly Amazon-the-retailer, Amazon-the-third-party-marketplace, Amazon Basics, Prime...

        Microsoft should have been properly sliced up in the 90s, and it would have prevented this nasty Amazon/Google/Microsoft/Apple/Oracle/Facebook problem quite nicely. Rather than trying to constantly gobble up all of all tech sectors, businesses would have been much more likely to remain profitable within their niche.

        That certainly would have been ideal. I would like to see a lot of these giant tech companies broken up. Particularly Amazon-the-retailer, Amazon-the-third-party-marketplace, Amazon Basics, Prime Video, Amazon-the-delivery-service, AWS, etc. But Google would be another good one — their smart home services have degraded over time as Google seems to have lost interest in it, to use one example.

        That said, this is America, and I don't think we break up giant companies anymore.

        But perhaps there is some hesitation around this now from Big Tech. Microsoft recently pulled a stunt where they de facto acquired a company (Inflection AI) without literally acquiring them.

        Microsoft has agreed to pay AI startup Inflection about $650 million in cash in an unusual deal that would allow Microsoft to use Inflection's models and hire most of the startup's staff including its co-founders, a person familiar with the matter told Reuters on Thursday.

        I don't think they would do this unless they suspected they might get in trouble for just buying the company outright, the way they once might have.

        5 votes
  3. [2]
    GunnarRunnar
    Link
    So what are the actual repercussions from this decision?

    So what are the actual repercussions from this decision?

    3 votes
    1. dreamless_patio
      Link Parent
      From the article:

      From the article:

      Monday’s ruling did not include remedies for Google’s behavior. Judge Mehta will now decide that, potentially forcing the company to change the way it runs or to sell off part of its business.

      8 votes