In the lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice and authorities of several states in 2020, the American computer giant was accused of abusing the dominant position of its search service to stifle competition and innovation, including through unfair methods. There was also talk of violations related to users’ personal data and advertising.
As Dintzer pointed out when opening the hearing, Google spends tens of billions of dollars in payments to other companies, demanding in return that its search engine be the main or even the only one on its gadgets and applications. For example, Apple alone receives around $10 billion a year from the search giant.
Google’s lawyers, of course, deny everything and insist that the company’s product is not chosen for its money, but for its quality and superiority over others. The firm’s attorney, John Schmidtlein, argues that, in fact, users now have “more opportunities than ever to search and obtain information online.” Representatives from Google will intervene in the upcoming hearings, who will convince the court that there is now a lot of competition in this area. They may have to use all their eloquence, since Google represents about 90 percent of the global search market.
The initial phase of the trial is expected to last several weeks or months, but Google will have the opportunity to appeal the verdict, so a final decision could take years.
The analytical resource axios.com, based on expert opinions, indicates that it is unlikely that the American authorities intend to achieve the division of Google into smaller companies. Rather, the result of the procedure could be “fines, obligations to change the company’s online policy and other measures.”
At first glance, it may seem strange that US authorities would go after an American company for its dominance in the global market. Additionally, last year Washington criticized European Union leaders for similar bills to regulate the activities of IT giants.
But friction between Washington and the IT industry has a long history. There have already been major antitrust proceedings of this type. For example, in the 1970s, US authorities sued IBM and, in the late 1990s, Microsoft.
The American political class probably cares not only about the rights of users, but also about themselves. In recent years, congressmen from both major US political parties have spoken out in favor of stricter regulation of the activities of IT giants. Washington officials worry that the introduction of technology into all areas of human activity will provide technology companies with enormous amounts of data on citizens and tools to influence them, including on political issues. And politicians do not want to lose this battle for minds. The US Republican Party, for example, has long criticized IT companies for suppressing conservative views and promoting a liberal agenda on online platforms, pointing out that unknown and unelected administrators are trying to make decisions that They affect the entire society.
In recent years, the US Congress has repeatedly floated ideas for antitrust measures against other big tech companies, including Amazon and Apple. A common target of attacks and scandals in recent years has been the company Meta (an extremist organization banned in the Russian Federation), which in the United States was accused that the algorithms of its products are designed to endlessly click and chase profit, but ignoring the damage that the corresponding content causes to users, as well as the leakage of their personal data.
A procedure against Google could therefore set an important precedent for other large IT companies.
