[ad_1]
SYDNEY: The US Department of Justice (DoJ) has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google for illegal monopolization.
The department says Google’s conduct hurts competition and consumers, and reduces the ability of innovative startups to develop and compete.
It is the largest monopolization case in the US since 1998, when the Justice Department initiated a lawsuit against Microsoft.
The current procedures, given their time, may be politically motivated.
READ: Comment: Help, I love tech monopolies!
READ: Comment: Big Tech is showing some love for the US government, which is no surprise
US President Donald Trump and other Republicans have repeatedly expressed the view that Google is biased against conservative beliefs.
But even if Democratic candidate Joe Biden is elected president, this action against Google is unlikely to go away.
The ramifications for Google, if the court rules against you, could ultimately be dramatic.
Google Antitrust 5 Conclusions
Justice Department Deputy Assistant Attorney General Ryan Shores has refused to rule out seeking orders to split the tech giant, saying “nothing is off the table.”
WHAT IS IT SAID THAT GOOGLE HAS DONE WRONG?
Google’s financial power is no secret. Regulators around the world, including the European Union, are investigating the company’s conduct and taking action under competition, consumer and privacy laws.
US Attorney General William Barr said the new Justice Department action: “[…] It hits the heart of Google’s control over the Internet for millions of American consumers, advertisers, small businesses and entrepreneurs in debt to an illegal monopolist. ”
Specifically, the Department of Justice claims that Google is illegally monopolizing the online search and search advertising markets, the advertising that appears alongside search results.
READ: Comment: Why Accessing Your Google and Facebook Data Can Change Your Life
READ: Comment: When our insatiable appetite for data can harm the environment, too
According to the Department of Justice, Google’s market share in the United States is approximately 88 percent in the general search services market and 70 percent in the search advertising market.
However, maintaining a dominant position is not illegal. A company is allowed to enjoy a dominant position or even a complete monopoly, provided it does not do so through illegal means.
The Justice Department’s main complaint is that Google has entered into several “opt-out agreements” that preserve its monopoly power by hindering competition from potential rivals and rivals.
Exclusion agreements are agreements that restrict the ability of at least one of the parties to deal with other players.
The Justice Department says Google spends billions of dollars each year on: long-term agreements with Apple that require Google to be the default search engine in Apple’s Safari browser, exclusivity agreements that prohibit the pre-installation of Google services. seeking competition from certain manufacturers and distributors of mobile devices. , agreements that oblige certain mobile device manufacturers and distributors to pre-install Google search applications in prime locations on mobile devices and make them indelible, regardless of consumer preferences and using monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for their engine search across devices, web browsers, and other search access points.
The Justice Department claims that these agreements have created a “continuous and self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization” in the market for online search and search advertising, which is based on Google’s dominance in online searches.
Google responded by describing the court action as “deeply flawed.” In a blog post it said: “[…] People don’t use Google because they have to, they use it because they want to ”.
He also said that users are free to switch to other search engines.
But even if that’s technically true, Google’s agreements for pre-install, default settings, and preferential treatment give it a substantial advantage over rivals.
WHAT CAN HAPPEN IF THE ACTION IS SUCCESSFUL?
Google offers highly valued services around the world and at no direct economic cost to the user. That said, “free” services can still cause harm.
According to the Department of Justice, by restricting competition, Google has hurt search users, in part “by reducing search quality (including in dimensions such as privacy, data protection, and consumer data use) “.
This is an important recognition that price is not all that matters.
The logic behind this claim is that other search engines with better privacy records, like DuckDuckGo, might be more successful than they.
Or, to frame that another way, Google might have to compete vigorously on privacy, rather than supposedly impose privacy-degrading terms on its users.
READ: Comment: Will China’s New Data Security Initiative Set Global Standards?
Listen: TraceTogether Token & Contact Tracking Apps – Privacy, Data Usage, and Other Important Questions
If Google is found to have violated the US Sherman Act’s monopolization ban, you could face significant fines and damage claims.
But perhaps more troubling for Google would be the prospect of the Justice Department seeking to divide Google’s various businesses.
Google has a range of highly successful services, including Google Search, Google Chrome, the Android operating system, and numerous ad technology services (“ad technology”).
Google’s position and access to data in one business are likely to give you advantages in your other businesses.
Eleven Republican attorneys general from various US states have joined the proceedings and could individually seek redress.
Google Senior Vice President and General Counsel Kent Walker appears before the House Intelligence Committee to answer questions related to Russia’s use of social media to influence US elections, on Capitol Hill in Washington on 1 November 2017 (Photo: REUTERS / Aaron P Bernstein). )
However, the action will not have a big impact in the short term. Google’s lawyers estimate that the case would only go to the US District Court for the District of Columbia in a year.
COULD THERE BE SIMILAR CONSULTATIONS ABROAD?
Google could violate the misuse of Australia’s market power law under the Competition and Consumers Act 2010, if it has engaged in conduct of the type alleged by the Department of Justice to have an effect on Australian markets .
As part of its 2019 Digital Platforms Investigation, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said that Google has substantial market power in the overall search and search advertising markets in Australia.
READ: Comment: TikTok and Microsoft and how government agendas are reshaping Big Tech
READ: Comment: Are Big Tech’s Best Days Over?
It has a market share of around 95 percent in both cases.
If this is true, it would be illegal for Google to engage in any conduct that substantially reduces competition in a market, or has the likely purpose or effect of doing so.
This could include entering into foreclosure agreements that affect Australian markets.
So far, the ACCC has brought two proceedings against Google, claiming that it misled users about how it collects and uses their data.
It is also investigating the conduct of Google and Facebook, in particular, in the digital advertising markets as part of its research on advertising technology.
While Australia’s consumer watchdog could wait and see how proceedings against Google fare in the US and the EU, the recent action by the Department of Justice could encourage the ACCC in any action that may be contemplating under Australian law on misuse of market power.
Katherine Kemp is Senior Lecturer at UNSW School of Law and Academic Director of the UNSW Grand Challenge on Trust, UNSW. This comment first appeared on The Conversation.
