In a case that could redefine the digital landscape, Google and the U.S. Justice Department concluded their closing arguments on Friday. The central claim is that Google's Alphabet unit has unlawfully dominated web search and related advertising, challenging what could be the \"future of the internet.\"
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who oversaw the proceedings in Washington, delved deep into whether platforms like ByteDance's TikTok and Meta's Facebook and Instagram serve as viable substitutes for search advertising revenues. This question of \"substitute-ability\" is pivotal for the court's decision on whether Google's practices violate civil antitrust laws.
Judge Mehta highlighted the significance of Google’s assessment of competitors’ pricing strategies and its impact on the market. With Google's advertising business accounting for about three-quarters of its revenue, the stakes are incredibly high.
U.S. government lawyer David Dahlquist emphasized that \"advertising revenue is what drives Google's monopoly power today,\" arguing that Google's lack of fear in raising prices or stalling product improvements indicates monopolistic behavior. He starkly stated, \"Only a monopolist can make a product worse and still make more money.\"
In contrast, Google's lawyer John Schmidtlein pointed out that Google's share of U.S. digital advertising revenue has been on the decline. He highlighted the competitive pressure from platforms like TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and Amazon, arguing that advertisers have ample alternatives, which keeps Google in check. Schmidtlein also contended that Google's continuous innovation in search advertising disproves claims of monopolistic complacency.
The trial, which began on September 12, has seen testimonies from major players like Verizon, Samsung Electronics, and Google itself. Key points include the substantial annual payments Google made in 2021 to keep its search engine as the default on smartphones and browsers, maintaining its dominant market position.
Another contentious issue was the government's allegation that Google deliberately destroyed internal documents relevant to the case. Judge Mehta questioned Google's document retention policies, suggesting that the lack of adequate preservation could have serious consequences. Google's lawyer, Colette Connor, defended the company's practices as reasonable and urged the court to refrain from imposing sanctions.
This case marks the beginning of a series of legal challenges aimed at curbing the market power of major tech giants. Following the initial case filed during former President Donald Trump's administration, the Biden administration has continued this trend with additional cases against companies like Amazon.com and Apple Inc.
The outcome of this trial will not only impact Google but could set a precedent for how tech companies operate and compete in the increasingly digital global economy.
Reference(s):
Google trial wraps up as judge weighs landmark U.S. antitrust claims
cgtn.com
