U.S. Government Sues Google For Anticompetitive Activities In Its Search Engine And Ad Items

 

An antitrust case against Google has been brought by the United States government, accusing it of anti-competitive practices and exploiting its market position in online search and advertising.

 U.S. In antitrust case, government Brings Google To Court

Eleven counties, including Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Texas, have filed a lawsuit. The grievance states:

"This action is brought under Section 2 of the Sherman Act by the United States of America, acting under the direction of the Attorney General of the United States, and the States of Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Texas, acting through their respective Attorneys General 15 U.S.C. § 2, to prohibit Google LLC (Google) from illegally retaining, by anti-competitive and exclusionary practices, monopolies in the markets for general search services, search ads and general search text advertising in the United States and to remedy the consequences of such actions."

The specifics in the complaint address how the default status of Google on different platforms and browsers, size, exclusive offers, and power over search engine distribution networks, help its anti-competitive practices, and prohibit rivals from succeeding.

The complaint also addresses the status of Google during the Microsoft antitrust lawsuit, and how it maintains the same policies that Microsoft did back then. Google does this, though in a smarter way and attempts to avoid any words that can be used against it in verbal or written correspondence.

"Google believed back then that the activities of Microsoft were anticompetitive, and yet, Today, to support its own monopolies, Google is deploying the same playbook. But one thing Google learned from Microsoft was to carefully pick its phrases to escape antitrust scrutiny. Google's Chief Economist, referring to an infamous line from the Microsoft case, wrote: "We should be careful about what we say in both public and private terms." It is important to stop 'cutting off the air supply' and similar phrases. "In addition, Google staff received specific instructions on what language to use and not use in emails, as has been publicly reported, because "Words matter. "In particular, Google workers were told to avoid using words such as "bundle," "tie," "crush," "destroy," "hurt," or "block" competition, and to avoid observing that in any industry, Google has "market control."

Google's Response To The Lawsuit

On its blog, Google has written a thorough response to the complaint, and calls it faulty and doubtful. Its position is that the litigation does not serve consumers, and will actually boost telephone rates, which are now subsidized by its search engine advertisement revenue. It also defended its practice of promoting its search engine, much like the promotion of any other product.

"Yeah, we pay to advertise our services, like countless other firms, just like a cereal brand might pay a store to stock its goods at the end of a row or on a shelf at eye level. It has a kind of home screen "eye level shelf" for digital services when you first purchase a smartphone. This shelf is operated by Apple, as well as companies such as AT&T, Verizon, Samsung and LG on mobile. The shelf space is managed overwhelmingly by Microsoft on desktop computers."

"So, we negotiate agreements with many of those companies for eye-level shelf space. But let's be clear—our competitors are readily available too, if you want to use them."

"Our agreements with Apple and other smartphone manufacturers and carriers are no different from the agreements that have historically been used to deliver devices by many other firms. For these contracts, other search engines, like Microsoft's Bing, compete with us. And our acquisitions have gone through repeated antitrust checks."

The blog also demonstrates how simple it is to adjust the default search engine on Apple, Android, and Windows devices.

The firm also says that it recognizes that scrutiny comes with success, and expects the court to rule in its favor.

" we understand that scrutiny comes with our success, but we stand by our stance. American antitrust law is aimed at promoting innovation and helping customers, not tilting the playing field in favor of specific rivals or making it harder for individuals to get the services they want. We are sure that a court will find that either the evidence or the law do not square with this suit."

Our Take

This case has been going on for a long time. Google's power, scope, and size have evolved from the four Major Tech companies like no other and for a long time its market dominance has raised eyes. We expect this case to take years to resolve, but it may have ripple effects on Google's scrutiny in other areas like Europe in the meantime. We will keep you up to date on further progress.