Five Takeaways from the US Google Antitrust Case

After five weeks of testimony, during which some of the top executives in the tech industry testified, US government lawyers concluded their case on Tuesday in the significant antitrust trial against Google.

At the heart of the case is Google’s search engine and whether the company has acted illegally to maintain its overwhelming dominance.

Here are five things we’ve learned from the trial so far:

– Apple Makes Billions in Google –

Apple’s complicated relationship with Google was the main source of intrigue in the trial, as the US government claims that Google is able to maintain its monopoly by paying the iPhone maker billions of dollars each year.

The exact amount has yet to be disclosed, but some estimates cited in the evidence suggest that Google pays a total of ten billion dollars a year to Apple, Samsung and others to ensure that it maintains the default setting on web browsers or phones. .

However, Apple is paid a revenue-sharing deal, and analysts at investment firm Bernstein believe the amount could be as much as $20 billion a year, or 15 percent of Apple’s operating profit.

– Anything for Bing –

Another major player in the Washington DC experiment was Microsoft, which since 2009 has been trying to make its Bing search engine more than distant – also for Google.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella told the courtroom that it would be a “game changer” for Bing to beat the default on the iPhone, and court evidence revealed all the ways the Windows and Xbox maker was prepared to get there.

In 2018, discussions with Apple went so far as to propose rebranding Bing with a different name.

And according to Bloomberg, Microsoft even sold Bing outright to Apple to give Google some much-needed competition.

Nadella said he never gave up on finding a way to persuade the iPhone maker, but he became convinced over time that Apple was using its flirtation with Bing to negotiate with Google.

– “Bad optics” for Apple –

Hundreds of documents and emails have been submitted as evidence in the lawsuit, and include a potentially embarrassing observation made by current Google CEO Sundar Pichai about default contracts while still a product manager.

In a 2007 email, Pichai expressed concern that the default agreement with Apple might be bad “optics” if it mercilessly blindsided other browsers.

“I don’t think it’s a good user experience, and the optics aren’t good that we’re the only vendor in the browser.”

– “benevolent dictatorship” –

Another executive who took the stand was Arjan Dijk, Marketing Director of Booking.com. He described the online advertising market where the company had no choice but to buy ads through Google.

Dijk is a former Google employee, and his discussions with Google’s lawyer got heated at times, and Judge Amit Mehta had to intervene to get the conversation back on track.

Dijk complained that Booking.com had to use its fists to get its ads to rank well in search results.

He likened the company to a “benevolent dictatorship,” he said.

– Apple considered DuckDuckGo –

The lawsuit has seen a succession of CEOs and executives, including the boss of the DuckDuckGo search engine, which puts its primary focus on user privacy but has failed to achieve much success against Google.

CEO Gabriel Weinberg told the court that in 2018 he had serious discussions with Apple about making DuckDuckGo the default search engine for private browsing on the iPhone.

“We thought they were really interested,” Weinberg said.

But despite early enthusiasm, talks with Apple went nowhere, and Weinberg blamed Apple’s deal with Google, which he said also prevented him from tying up with Samsung and others.