Law Google’s antitrust trial for the ‘future of the internet’ starts up - The DOJ’s lawsuit against Google claims the company has become the most-used search engine not because of a superior product, but because it illegally uses its money to box out its competitors.

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
1000.png
U.S. Department of Justice lawyers, including Kenneth Dintzer, center, and Megan Bellshaw, right, arrive at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Federal Courthouse on Sept. 12, 2023 in Washington. | Nathan Howard/AP Photo

The Justice Department told a federal judge today that Google illegally abused its monopoly power as the largest online search tool to eliminate any potential competition from companies like Microsoft.

“This case is about the future of the internet, and whether Google’s search engine will ever face meaningful competition,” said DOJ lawyer Kenneth Dintzer during opening arguments in an antitrust trial seeking to break up Google’s power over the internet search and advertising industry. “To protect that future, we need to look to the past.”

Dintzer told U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C., that the government will prove Google willfully maintained an illegal monopoly starting as far back as 2010. He accused the internet giant of setting in motion a data and ad-driven feedback loop that “has been turning for more than 12 years – and it always turns to Google’s advantage.”

The DOJ’s lawsuit against Google claims the company has become the most-used search engine not because of a superior product, but because it illegally uses its money to box out its competitors – often by preventing potential rivals from accessing the data needed to compete.

“Google’s scale hermetically seals it from competition, and the court will hear from Google’s rivals that data is necessary to compete,” Dintzer said. There is also “direct evidence that Google is ignoring privacy concerns because it does not care about competition,” Dintzer said. Google’s conduct “affects all consumers, even those that prefer Google.”

The non-jury trial, which is expected to last two months, will be decided by Mehta, an Obama appointee. The trial kicked off in a packed courtroom, which Mehta joked “had the highest concentration of blue suits in D.C.” Jonathan Kanter, the top antitrust prosecutor at the DOJ and some of his key deputies were present in the courtroom, as was Kent Walker, Google’s head lawyer and the architect of its defense.

A court loss for Google could force major changes to its business arrangements and even the potential sale of key parts of the company. It would also put Google’s fellow internet giants on edge, as they face their own investigations and lawsuits.

In Google’s opening statement, it disputed the government’s case. “When the plaintiffs filed these lawsuits nearly three years ago, they did so with great public fanfare,” said John Schmidtlein, the company’s lead lawyer. He said the DOJ “claimed Google was the gatekeeper of the internet — but it turns out there are lots of ways users access the web other than default search engines. And people use them all the time.”

Over the next eight to 10 weeks, top executives from Google, Apple, Microsoft, Samsung and other companies will testify about the benefits and drawbacks of Google’s outsized role in the internet — arguing over whether the company is an aggrieved innovator being punished for its success or if it has intentionally stifled competition for its own financial gain.

The case centers on a series of revenue-sharing agreements, worth tens of billions of dollars annually, that Google has with Apple, Mozilla, Samsung and others to be the default search engine on web browsers and mobile phones, as well as its control of the ads that populate search results. Google does not disclose the exact value of the deals.

The DOJ says those contracts have hindered the ability of rivals to compete and deprived consumers of the benefits of high-quality, innovative services that only competition can foster.

“Google walks when it should run,” Dintzer said. “The lack of investment directly affects the quality of results.”

Schmidtlein, though, said the case was mostly about propping up Microsoft. “At every critical juncture, the evidence will show they [Microsoft] were beaten in the market — preferring instead to focus on their Windows monopoly,” Schmidtlein said.

“All of these companies want to be the default,” Schmidtlein said. The competition to be the default “are good for search innovation — and if Google is prevented from competing that is not going to make Microsoft or DuckDuckGo, or anyone else, run faster.”

The DOJ’s lawsuit leans heavily on a related Microsoft matter, its antitrust case against the software giant from the late 1990s. There the government accused the software giant of monopolistic behavior in making Internet Explorer the default browser in its Windows operating system, using the dominance of Windows to crush potential competitors such as Netscape.

The government initially won that case in district court, including a ruling breaking up the company. That was reversed on appeal, and the case ultimately ended in a settlement where Microsoft agreed to not block rival software companies in its contracts with computer makers. The ruling though is still a key legal precedent for monopolization cases.

Schmidtlein said however, that Google’s conduct is different. “Microsoft violated U.S. antitrust law by using its Windows monopoly to ... delete a browser preferred by consumers,” he said. “Google competed on the merits to earn pre-installation and default status ... those facts could not be more opposite and different than U.S. versus Microsoft.”

According to some estimates, including those cited in the DOJ’s lawsuit, Google controls about 90 percent of the search engine market in the U.S. and globally. The company “protects this money machine with a wall of defaults,” Dintzer said.

Google points to Mozilla switching its default search engine for its Firefox browser back to Google, after a brief experiment with Yahoo!, as evidence that the search giant’s product is superior.

But Dinzter said Yahoo! paid more than Google, and needed to fund that expense with more ads, which negatively impacted quality, so the company switched back to Google.

The DOJ and states say Google illegally monopolized the markets for “general search” and “general search advertising.” That essentially includes just Google, Microsoft’s Bing and a few other smaller players like DuckDuckGo. Google argues that fails to take in other sources of information, such as Amazon and TikTok.

Mehta showed himself to be an active questioner, peppering Dintzer and Cavanaugh with questions during opening statements — a time that typically goes uninterrupted. That included wanting to know why companies including Amazon and TikTok are not competitors. “Why is that wrong?” Mehta asked.

Those services don’t index the web,” Dintzer said. “The information on TikTok is limited to the information on TikTok. It’s not that those other services can’t answer some queries, but they can’t answer all queries with information from the internet.”

Nearly every state and the District of Columbia, Guam and Puerto Rico are also suing Google alongside the DOJ. They have similar claims to the DOJ, as well as allegations Google used its search advertising tool, SA360, to block advertisers from buying ads through Microsoft’s Bing.

The states also challenged how Google designs its search pages to discriminate against more specialized rivals like Yelp for local businesses, or Expedia for travel. Last month, however, Mehta threw out the latter argument, saying the AGs offered no evidence that Google’s conduct harmed the specialized search market.

“With SA360, Google puts another thumb on the scale, denying features to Microsoft,” said William Cavanaugh, on behalf of the states. Cavanaugh said Google denied features for Microsoft ads, that it used for itself.

The DOJ and states have also said Google has sought to stymie its investigation and lawsuit at every turn. And while bare-knuckle tactics are common in every courtroom, the government says Google destroyed a great deal of evidence in the form of deleted internal instant messages and abused its legal privilege to withhold other documents. The trial will be peppered throughout with disputes over missing evidence, and Mehta could ultimately sanction the company if he finds it acted nefariously.

Following opening statements, Hal Varian, Google’s chief economist will be the first witness.

Article Link

Archive
 
I'm doubtful anything permanent will happen. With that written, fuck Google. I've lost time and money because of them, while being subjected to constant surveillance worse than the USSR. The government's position here is bullshit and weak, but I want something to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoReturn
what's up with google limiting search results btw?
if you search something very generic like 'cat', you only get 17 pages (previously 20 was limit), for less generic searches you don't even get 17, you get 10 or less.
They don't want you even to see the shit they deliberately downranked to censor it.

They figured out the tactic of going to the very bottom and going up to find the actual truth. You know, as opposed to the sponsored "truth" they make their money pushing.
Please wreck Google's shit.
In favor of the Department of (((Justice)))? You serious dude?
 
On one hand I hate the government, on the other I hate Google and big fag companies. Is there a way both can lose?
There lived an old farmer who had worked in his fields for many, many years. One day, his horse bolted away. His neighbors dropped in to commiserate with him. “What awful luck,” they tut-tutted sympathetically, to which the farmer only replied, “We’ll see.”​
Next morning, to everyone’s surprise, the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses. “How amazing is that!” they exclaimed in excitement. The old man replied, “We’ll see.”​
A day later, the farmer’s son tried to mount one of the wild horses. He was thrown on the ground and broke his leg. Once more, the neighbors came by to express their sympathies for this stroke of bad luck. “We’ll see,” said the farmer politely.​
The next day, the village had some visitors – military officers who had come with the purpose of drafting young men into the army. They passed over the farmer’s son, thanks to his broken leg. The neighbors patted the farmer on his back – how lucky he was to not have his son join the army! “We’ll see,” was all that the farmer said.​
 
The DOJ says those contracts have hindered the ability of rivals to compete and deprived consumers of the benefits of high-quality, innovative services that only competition can foster.

“Google walks when it should run,” Dintzer said. “The lack of investment directly affects the quality of results.”
Makes sense, Google has been actively degrading the quality of their search engine for years now, but it's incredibly annoying to use other products because Google is the only one that is integrated into Chromium based browsers, which virtually everyone uses, so they get away with godawful search results. It's not impossible to use other search engines, just tedious by design.
I don't see how this case is substantially different from the case against Microsoft about Internet Explorer's integration into Windows.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Uncle Ted's Cabin
I use Brave browser and Brave search (use to use DDG until they started harvesting user data) and it’s fine.

There ought to be some baseline regulation on public search engines. Make it illegal to lie about results numbers, make it painfully obvious which results are ads and which are results, and ban non-search information on a search page (e.g. when you search ‘current weather’ it can’t present a forecast app or answer. It has to only give you links to an external website).

Other ideas can be regulating SEO and making it illegal to present results that have a conflict of interest (i.e. results can’t contain YouTube video links because YouTube is owned by Alphabet, but a separate ‘internal’ search tool can be used for this instead).
 
I wonder if they will pull a Microsoft and invest in a competitor to avoid being broken up. Regardless, I hope it's successful and that they go after Amazon and Apple after.
 
When I look up basic s*** I get results from Reddit CNN Fox News then uneven remotely related to the thing I search Google for some reason over the past 7 years has gotten even worse it used to actually sort of function
90% of the top results are s***** clearly indian-made clickbait websites and the other half is f****** Wikipedia
 
Why do Google products get worse with every update? Why do YouTube, Chromecast, and Google Search lose functionality every year? I don't fucking get it. I thought products were supposed to improve over time.
I remember using Google voice commands on a Galaxy S3 in like 2013 and it was snappy and accurate and useful for a whole bunch of tasks. It's a decade later, my phone is 10x faster, and voice commands are half the speed, half the accuracy and I stopped bothering to use it at all because it's faster to do manually.
 
I remember using Google voice commands on a Galaxy S3 in like 2013 and it was snappy and accurate and useful for a whole bunch of tasks. It's a decade later, my phone is 10x faster, and voice commands are half the speed, half the accuracy and I stopped bothering to use it at all because it's faster to do manually.
Google search (& voice commands, etc.) became useless around the beginning of the 2020 disinformation retardation IMO.
 
Huh? Is this something about complying with DMCAs?
No. Its the part where any inactive youtube account will get shoa'd this December. Channels like Filthy Frank is gonna disappear along with music channels and so will every undiscovered channel of spergs sperging out. And as Google is in control of youtube, they are to blame for destruction of priceless art.
 
No. Its the part where any inactive youtube account will get shoa'd this December. Channels like Filthy Frank is gonna disappear along with music channels and so will every undiscovered channel of spergs sperging out. And as Google is in control of youtube, they are to blame for destruction of priceless art.
Has anyone even used YouTube in the passed 5 years? They’re getting desperate with their whole forcing users to turn on history and revamping their ad systems. It’s a corporate shithole only the most desperate of losers go to anymore.
 
This couldn't come at a worst time for google: android is losing ground in the most profitable markets, stadia which was supposed to get them into gaming was an abysmal failure and openAI is massacring them in both search and AI.

Also search is the one thing that brings in the money, youtube AFAIK barely breaks even, and there's a myriad of other products and divisions within the company that will never make money.

My opinion? fuck it, I hope they are forced to spin search and adsense out, and that meta, msft and apple are next.
 
Wait. Wait. Wait.

As a business I am being told that the problem that I can't sell anything on line because I have to pay google 15% or else, is because I should have to pay one of these other companies 15%?

Fucking hell, the DoJ if now representing the interests of the businesses and not me, the consumer or guy trying to sell on line.

If I do not pay google 15%, my product evaporates and disappears from search engines, and somehow making Microsoft a peer to google will fix this?

Just fuck off with the bullshit man.
 
Back