A blow to Big Tech, but Alphabet remains the internet’s dominant force.
In a significant ruling that could alter our online experience, Judge Amit P. Mehta recently declared Google guilty of illegally monopolizing online search and advertising. Google secured over 90% of the search market by paying companies like Apple and Samsung to make its search engine the default on their devices. The court will now determine whether to break up the tech giant, a decision that could drastically change how we use the internet.
This decision is a major victory for the Justice Department (DOJ), which brought the case. It could also signal a shift in the judicial landscape, favoring the government and challenging Big Tech. Apple, Amazon, Meta, and Google have all faced antitrust suits, and Big Tech could now face more litigation.
While necessary, the court’s decision might come too late to have a substantial impact. Six years of legal disputes have allowed Google to further solidify its dominance. Even with this ruling, Google’s market share might only see a slight decrease. Microsoft tried to challenge Google by adding AI to Bing, but it made little difference. Google may simply be too large to fail.
Google’s monopoly is not just about its technological superiority but also its strategic business deals. The DOJ argues that Google has “foreclosed competition for internet search” through its exclusionary contracts, ownership of properties like the Android operating system, and operation of properties like devices with Google set as the default search engine. This ecosystem has allowed Google to maintain its dominance, not through innovation alone, but by ensuring competitors never had a real chance to challenge its supremacy.
Judge Mehta’s ruling acknowledges that Google outcompetes its rivals, not just through default settings, but by creating a superior product. As stated in the ruling, Apple and Microsoft occasionally discussed making Bing the default search engine in Apple products, but these talks were unsuccessful because Google’s system was simply better. Even when Microsoft offered Apple 100% of Bing’s revenue, it was only half of what Google could offer at a 36% revenue share. The power of Google’s default settings, while important, is just one aspect of the story.
Looking ahead, it’s difficult to imagine an internet not dominated by Google. But the ruling provides a limited opportunity for change. One potential outcome could see Google being forced to share its data with rival search engines, allowing them to develop more competitive alternatives. However, history suggests this might not significantly impact users – just look at what happened after Google lost its antitrust case in the European Union. Despite mandatory “choice screens” that prompted users to select a search engine,
Moreover, the rise of AI could make this entire legal battle irrelevant. As AI-powered tools like ChatGPT gain popularity, traditional search engines might become less important. This ruling could even accelerate the shift toward AI, as users seek alternatives to Google. However, Judge Mehta remains unconvinced that AI is yet a full replacement for traditional search.
As Google faces a trial to determine remedies, many options have been proposed, including choice screens, restrictions on deals, data sharing, or even forced divestiture of Chrome or Android. However, none of these proposed remedies seem well-targeted, especially since the court’s opinion is unclear about the exact harm Google committed.
The DOJ’s victory also increases the risk for other pending cases. Legal scholars generally believe Google’s cases have the strongest legal basis, suggesting that Big Tech’s legal troubles are far from over.
Ultimately, the ruling against Google may symbolize a turning point in the tech industry. However, whether it will lead to meaningful change or simply be a footnote in Google’s continued dominance remains to be seen. For now, the internet is still very much Google’s world.