US Considers Breaking Up Google Following Antitrust Ruling

A week after a judge ruled that Alphabet’s Google illegally monopolized the online search market, the US Department of Justice is exploring various remedies, including the potential breaking up of the tech giant, which is valued at around $2 trillion, according to reports from the New York Times and Bloomberg News.

One of the most frequently discussed remedies among justice department attorneys is the divestment of the Android operating system. This move acts as a way to reduce Google’s control over the mobile market, where Android has a significant presence.

In addition, officials are contemplating the possible sale of AdWords, Google’s search ad program, and the divestment of its Chrome web browser. These measures aim to dismantle the components that contribute to Google’s dominant position in the online search and advertising markets.

US Considers Breaking Up Google Following Antitrust Ruling

A spokesperson for the Justice Department stated that they are currently evaluating the court’s decision and will determine the next steps in accordance with the court’s directions and the applicable legal framework for antitrust remedies. As of now, no final decisions have been made. Google, on its part, has declined to comment on these developments and is planning to appeal the ruling. Another antitrust lawsuit against Google by the US Justice Department will go to trial next month.

Other options the justice department considers include forcing Google to share data with competitors and implementing measures to prevent it from gaining an unfair advantage in AI products. These proposals aim to foster a more competitive environment by limiting Google’s ability to use its vast resources and data to stifle competition.

The trial revealed that Google paid companies, including Apple, more than $26 billion in 2021 alone to remain the default search option in Safari. The judge found that these deals enabled Google to build a monopoly over search and unfairly suppress competition.

Neil Chilson, the former chief technologist for the FTC, expressed scepticism about the likelihood of breaking up Google, calling it “total wish casting.” He pointed out that Judge Mehta’s antitrust approach did not suggest a breakup as a plausible remedy. According to Chilson, a breakup would not address the core issue of exclusive contracts for default placements.

See Also: Google Under Fire for Promoting AI Apps Creating Nonconsensual Nudes

Following the judge’s ruling, DuckDuckGo, a competing search engine, proposed banning these exclusive agreements to promote fair competition.

The recent verdict marks a significant win for federal authorities challenging the market dominance of big tech companies. The judge concluded that Google violated antitrust laws by spending billions to create an illegal monopoly and become the world’s default search engine.

Analysts compare it to Microsoft’s settlement with the Justice Department in 2004 over claims that it forced its Internet Explorer web browser on Windows users. Alden Abbott, former general counsel for the FTC, warned that divesting Google’s various businesses would be “disastrous” and unlikely. He referenced the 2001 court of appeals decision in US v Microsoft, which rejected breaking up Microsoft despite its illegal monopolizing conduct. Abbott argued that authorities should not order the breakup of Google because it would be economically destructive.

The final outcome of this case will have significant implications for the future of antitrust enforcement in the technology sector.