WHAT NEXT FOR GOOGLE AFTER COURT RULING?

Following what many have described as a landmark decision by the US District Judge Amit Mehta, fingers are crossed in anticipation as to what Google’s next line of actions will be.

The US District Court in a ruling held that Google’s dominance in the search market is a result of illegal monopolistic practices. The judge Amit Mehta maintained that Google’s actions have quieted competition and innovation, insisting that the company’s default search agreements with device manufacturers and browsers were a key factor in its market dominance. According to the court, Google abused its market power by unlawfully hampering competition in internet search engine.

What is the main argument of the case?

The case against Google is that Google spent billions in entering exclusive deals to maintain unjustified advantage in the search engine market which according to the court is a violation of the US antitrust laws. Google is reportedly accused of paying about $26 billion to companies like Apple to make its search engine the default option on their devices like iPhones and browsers like Safari and Mozilla which the department of justice argued that these agreements by Google with wireless carriers, browser developers, and other device manufacturers, especially Apple were anti-competitive.

Google derided the allegations of technological bullying by insisting customers have overtime had the leverage of changing search engines when not satisfied with the services or results they were getting, the company cited the example of Yahoo – which used to be a major popular search engine in the 1990s before Google came on board now being a minor player on the internet. But the judge though recognized Google’s search engine as the best widely available in the market, ruled that the agreements with some of the companies that used her search engine as the default engine boosted its market share.

The antitrust laws

The antitrust laws are regulations made to ensure and promote fair competition through the prevention of monopolies, anti-competitive practices, and other activities that could harm consumers or other businesses which several of them exist in the United States such as the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, which prohibits monopolies and actions that restrain trade, and the clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which addresses specific unfair practices.

Under the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Federal Trade Commission (FCT) was established in 1914 with the mandate to investigate and prevent unfair competition and the Antitrust Division enforce the various Antitrust laws.

Various reports have it that Google generates about $175 billion in 2022 as against other search-based advertising like Microsoft’s Bing which generates about $12 billion. In a trial that spanned for about 10 weeks, the judge Amit Mehta’s labeled google a ‘‘monopolist’’ and highlighted the sheer volume of Google’s search queries compared to rivals, with Google ‘‘enjoying 89.2% share of market for general services and 94.9% on mobile devices.’’  Stating that other search engines like Microsoft’s Bing can capture significant market share if not for Google’s default status agreements. The judge concluded that while Google violated antitrust laws, it did not have ‘‘anticompetitive effects.’’ A decision which US Attorney General described as an “historic win for the American people” insisting that no company no matter how big is above the law.

What next for Google?

With the ruling crashing Google’s parent company Alphabet’s share by 4.6% and court now to decide on the remedies that Google will undertake which may include restrictions on Google’s to enter into exclusive deals, the question on the lips of every customer especially those glued to the services of the search-service giant will be what next? Considering that the Consumer Choice Center, a lobbying group criticized the decision as a step in the wrong direction, with the head of DoJ’s antitrust division saying the ruling will pave way for innovation and protect access to information, and another pending case against Google related to digital advertising instituted by the DoJ, it remains to be seen what the future holds for Google and its partners.

While the final state of the whole scenario is not yet known or determined, Google through her president of global affairs Kent Walker, said the company will appeal the decision. The company is arguing that its dominance was due to the quality of its search engine, stating that the ruling restricts their ability to make their search engine readily available even after the court recognizes their search engine’s quality.