Adapted by:
Javier Pastor
Senior WriterComputer scientist turned tech journalist. I've written about almost everything related to technology, but I specialize in hardware, operating systems and cryptocurrencies. I like writing about tech so much that I do it both for Xataka and Incognitosis, my personal blog.
Karen Alfaro
WriterCommunications professional with a decade of experience as a copywriter, proofreader, and editor. As a travel and science journalist, I've collaborated with several print and digital outlets around the world. I'm passionate about culture, music, food, history, and innovative technologies.
The U.S. legal and regulatory offensive against Google marks a new turning point between the government and big tech companies. The Department of Justice (DOJ) isn’t just seeking symbolic action—it’s trying to rewrite the rules, making Google its primary target and setting an example for the rest of the sector.
Google’s vicious circle. According to The Verge, David Dahlquist, a lawyer for the DOJ, explained in his statement of facts how Google benefits from its “vicious cycle.” The company pays billions of dollars to be the default search engine virtually everywhere. As a result, it gets more searches, gathers more data, improves its results, makes more money and can pay even more to extend its privileged position.
Threats to Google. This is a nightmare for the DOJ, and the antitrust case will test whether these arguments carry consequences. The government is asking for three major changes that could radically affect Google’s business.
No default search engine deals. The DOJ’s first request is to stop Google from entering agreements that make its search engine the default. The clearest example is its deal with Apple, which allegedly brings in $20 billion a year to make Google the default on iPhones, iPads, and Macs. This could make Apple a collateral victim in the monopoly case.
Sell Chrome. There are also plans to force Google to divest from its Chrome browser. According to Dahlquist, Chrome accounts for 35% of searches and has an estimated 4 billion users. Google argues it isn’t a business in itself, but if put up for sale, it would become a clear target for competitors. OpenAI has shown interest, and DuckDuckGo executives estimate Chrome’s value at around $50 billion.
License search data. The third and final request is especially sensitive: Google would have to license all of its search data—from its index to its results. This would allow others to “build their search engine,” essentially creating a fork of Google. One of Google’s lawyers, John Schmidtlein, warned this would let anyone “cut and paste Google’s search results and call them your own.” He also cautioned that it could threaten users’ privacy and security.
Give up years of work. That would mean Google must give up—or potentially sell—that data, a move many would see as unfair. The company has spent a quarter-century crawling and organizing information on the web, and now it’s being asked to license that work. This would open the door to fierce competition from companies willing to pay for access to that filtered knowledge.
Historical framework. Although the EU has traditionally been the main nemesis of American Big Tech, the U.S. has also scrutinized its largest companies. It dismantled Standard Oil in 1911 and attempted to break up Microsoft two decades ago. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a former presidential candidate, has long pushed to break up major American tech companies and made that part of her 2020 campaign. She explicitly targeted Amazon, Google, and Facebook.
The courts: a barrier to pressure. While Big Tech can exert influence in regulatory and legislative arenas, the judicial system is less susceptible to that pressure. In Google’s case, the DOJ has even proposed creating a technical committee to oversee compliance with its decisions. That would further limit the company’s ability to bypass restrictions.
Image | Allen Boguslavsky
Related | Desperate to Compete With ChatGPT, Google Has a Plan to Get Gemini Everywhere: Money
View 0 comments