Google accused of using illegal tactics to suppress competition

Google has been accused of using illegal tactics to suppress competition and maintain its monopoly in the search engine market.

A US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google manipulated its dominance to stifle innovation and hinder competitors, violating antitrust laws in the process.

This ruling marks a significant victory for US authorities seeking to challenge the unchecked power of Big Tech companies like Google.

The ruling highlights Google’s overwhelming control of the search market, with the tech giant holding a staggering 89.2% share of general search services, which jumps to a whopping 94.9% on mobile devices.

This level of market dominance not only solidifies Google’s position as a monopolist but also illustrates the extent to which it has suppressed competition in the industry.

By leveraging its market power, Google allegedly engaged in anti-competitive practices that restricted consumer choice and hampered the ability of smaller rivals to thrive in the digital landscape.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland hailed the court’s decision as a “historic win for the American people,” emphasizing that no company, regardless of size or influence, should be exempt from the law.

The ruling serves as a crucial reminder that even tech giants like Google are not above legal scrutiny and must be held accountable for any anti-competitive behaviors that harm market competition and consumer welfare.

Google’s parent company, Alphabet, had contended that its dominance in the search engine market was a result of consumer preference for its widely-used platform.

However, the court’s decision challenges this narrative, underscoring Google’s calculated efforts to cement its monopoly status through potentially unlawful means.

With Google processing an astounding 8.5 billion queries daily worldwide, its influence over online search activities is undeniable, raising concerns about the implications of unchecked corporate power on competition and innovation in the tech sector.

This ruling sets the stage for a second trial to determine potential remedies, including the possibility of breaking up Alphabet. Such a move could reshape the landscape of online advertising, an industry that Google has long dominated.

This case is part of a broader effort to address alleged monopolistic practices among Big Tech companies, including Meta, Amazon, and Apple.

Senator Amy Klobuchar, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s antitrust subcommittee, highlighted the bipartisan support for antitrust enforcement, calling the ruling a significant victory for competition.

The case painted Google as a powerful force that stifled competition to maintain its position as a leading search engine and digital advertising giant, with revenue exceeding $240 billion in the previous year.

The Justice Department lawyers have made a compelling argument against Google, stating that the tech giant’s monopoly has allowed it to charge advertisers exorbitant prices while neglecting to put in the necessary effort to improve the quality of its search engine.

This lackadaisical approach has ultimately harmed users, who are not getting the best possible search experience. Judge Mehta’s ruling shed light on the massive amount of money Google spends each year to secure its place as the default search engine on new devices, with over $26 billion spent in 2021 alone.

Despite this ruling, experts predict that the appeal process will be a long and drawn-out one, meaning that any significant changes for users and advertisers may be put on hold for the foreseeable future.

The implications of this case could have far-reaching consequences for the tech industry and the way monopolies are regulated.

Go to Who Owns Africa for more news from the African continent.

Follow Who Owns Africa on Twitter @Who Owns Africa, on Facebook at Who Owns Africa or on Instagram at whoownsafrica