Federal court finds Google in illegal search monopoly
The U.S. Department of Justice has succeeded in antitrust action against Google for its search and advertising practices.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of the DOJ in a federal suit it initially brought against Google in fall 2020. The suit alleged Google maintained illegal monopolies in its general search services, search advertising, and general search text advertising.
According to the suit, Google controls 88% of the U.S. search market and more than 70% of the U.S. search ad market, as well as hosts 94% of mobile searches. Google was accused of using this position to unfairly dominate the search market and charge inflated prices for services which would be higher-quality with more balanced competition.
"This victory against Google is an historic win for the American people,” said U.S. attorney general Merrick Garland in an official statement. “No company — no matter how large or influential — is above the law. The Justice Department will continue to vigorously enforce our antitrust laws.”
"This landmark decision holds Google accountable. It paves the path for innovation for generations to come and protects access to information for all Americans,” said assistant attorney general Jonathan Kanter in the statement. “This victory is a reflection on the tireless efforts of the dedicated public servants at the antitrust division and our state law enforcement partners whose work made today’s decision possible.”
In his official federal court ruling, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta said that by spending tens of billions of dollars to be the exclusive search provider for Apple and other mobile technology providers, Google engaged in anti-competitive behavior and also charged unfairly high prices for search advertising due to the monopoly it obtained from these contracts, which unfairly shut out competing search engines such as Bing and Duck Duck Go.
“This decision recognizes that Google offers the best search engine but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available,” Google president of global affairs Kent Walker said in a statement to NPR.
In an email to Chain Store Age, Jennifer Huddleston, senior fellow in technology policy at the Cato Institute, said that at least in the short term this decision may hinder consumer efforts to find information online.
"Notably, the decision focused not on the end user consumer or their preferences for various search services but on the underlying agreements between various businesses," Huddleston said in the email. "It is unclear what the potential remedies might be or how they will impact the consumer experience. Consumers already had choices to change in most, if not all, products where Google is the default, but remedies will likely create more friction in the initial process or provide consumers with a less preferable default."
[READ MORE: Warren proposes breaking up Amazon, Google and Facebook]
However, public commentary from Richard Trent, executive director of the Main Street Alliance, was more favorable toward the ruling.
"This decision is a monumental step towards restoring fairness in the marketplace," said Trent. "For too long, small businesses have struggled against the overwhelming dominance of corporate giants like Google. This ruling not only recognizes the anti-competitive practices that have disadvantaged small businesses but also sets a precedent for stronger enforcement of antitrust laws."
