(CN) — A federal judge slammed Google in his verdict in a landmark antitrust case that threatens the tech giant’s dominance in internet search.
U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta acknowledged in a nearly 300-page opinion filed Monday that Google’s search engine has remained ubiquitous in the digital landscape for more than 15 years through innovation, smart hiring and shrewd business decisions.
“But Google also has a major, largely unseen advantage over its rivals: default distribution,” Mehta, a Barack Obama appointee, wrote.
The Mountain View, California, company signed anticompetitive agreements with Apple and other tech companies to ensure its product was the default search engine on phones and web browsers, Mehta found. As part of the deal, Google agreed to share advertising revenue generated through its searches.
“Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly,” Mehta wrote.
The landmark decision, which follows a 10-week bench trial that began in September 2023 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, represented a major victory for regulators seeking to curb Big Tech's influence in the digital sphere.
Attorney General Merrick Garland said Monday's decision was evidence that no company was above the law.
“This victory against Google is a historic win for the American people,” Garland said.
Jonathan Kanter, the top Justice Department antitrust official, said the decision "paves the path for innovation for generations to come and protects access to information for all Americans."
Attorneys for the Justice Department argued Google, a $1.7 trillion company, has created a monopoly with its search engine, commanding more than 90% of all internet searches. Its closest competitor, the Microsoft-owned Bing, conducts roughly 6 percent of searches.
Federal attorneys presented evidence at trial that challenged Microsoft's practice of using its search engine, MSN Search, as the default option when it launched Internet Explorer 7 in 2005. An email from Google’s lawyers to Microsoft’s attorneys raised concerns nearly identical to those expressed in the federal government’s suit against Google.
“We are deeply concerned about potential for harm to the competitive process from Microsoft’s actions,” a Google attorney wrote in a 2005 letter.
In addition to solidifying itself as the default search engine, the government says that since it was founded in 1998, Google has also dominated search advertising, forcing marketers to use its products while increasing prices.
Google CEO Sundar Pichai testified at trial that his company fiercely competes with its competitors, even as it inked the default-distribution deals with competitors.
Google attorney John Schmidtlein of Washington firm Williams & Connolly said in closing arguments the company earned its position by offering a better product.
“The [default] payments are the reflection of competition,” Schmidtlein said.
Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, said the company intends to appeal Mehta’s findings.
"This decision recognizes that Google offers the best search engine, but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available," Walker said.
Mehta is expected to schedule a second trial in coming months to determine a proper punishment for Google, which could result in fines or parts of the company being sold off.
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders called for the judge to break up the tech company in a post Monday on X.
"Google may be a $2 trillion corporation. Its founders may be worth $292 billion," Sanders said. "But it's not above the law. It’s time to hold Google accountable and break it up."
Follow @SteveGarrisonPC
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
Former Vice President Dick Cheney says he will vote for Kamala Harris September 6, 2024 -
