In August, U.S. federal judge Amit Mehta declared Google a monopoly, and the Justice Department began working on solutions to address the company’s illegal behavior and restore competition in the search engine market. The department is considering both “behavioral and structural remedies” as potential solutions.
Proposed Remedies for Google’s Monopoly
A wide range of actions could be taken. Options include monitoring Google’s behavior or even forcing the sale of certain parts of the business, such as Chrome, Android, or Google Play. These assets—Google’s browser, mobile platform, and mobile app store—are viewed as central to maintaining the company’s dominant position in the search engine market.
Issues Raised by the Plaintiffs
One major concern raised by the plaintiffs is Google’s practice of paying to make its search engine the default on other platforms, such as the Apple iPhone. According to the Justice Department, “competitors cannot compete for these distribution channels because Google’s monopoly-funded revenue-sharing payments deprive its partners of an incentive to send queries to Google’s competitors.” This tactic reinforces Google’s control over search traffic, limiting competition, notes NIX Solutions.
The Justice Department also highlights aspects of Google’s operations that influence user behavior. For instance, one potential remedy could involve Google supporting educational campaigns to help users better choose a search engine that meets their needs.
Google’s Response
Unsurprisingly, Google disagrees with the Justice Department’s proposed actions. According to the company, the suggested measures “go far beyond the court’s ruling on search distribution contracts.” Google argues that breaking up key assets like Chrome or Android would be excessive, claiming that “billions of people access the Internet thanks to Chrome and Android, which exist as free products.”
Google also noted that only “a small number of companies have the opportunity and incentive to keep them open-source and invest in them at the same level that we have.” Despite the ongoing debate, we’ll keep you updated on further developments in this case.