Google Justifies Billions Paid to Keep Search Engine at the Forefront

On Tuesday, Google countered the US’s accusation that the company violated the law to maintain its dominant position in the search and advertising industry. Google emphasized that its search engine’s immense popularity is a result of its high quality and stated that dissatisfied users have the option to switch to alternative platforms with minimal effort.

The Justice Department has accused Google of paying billions of dollars annually to device makers like Apple Inc., wireless companies like AT&T and browser makers like Mozilla to keep its search engine market share at about 90 percent.

Google’s search engine is a key part of its business, driving ad sales and other revenue for the world’s fourth most valuable company.

“This case is about the future of the Internet,” said Kenneth Dintzer, arguing the Justice Department that Google began illegally maintaining its monopoly in 2010.

But Google lawyer John Schmidtlein said the payments compensate partners for work to ensure the software receives timely security updates and other maintenance.

“Users today have more search options and more ways to access information online than ever before,” Schmidtlein added. He went on to say that Google won the competition from Apple and Mozilla to choose the best search engines.

Google’s Schmidtlein claimed that disgruntled consumers only need “a few easy clicks” to switch the Google app on their devices or call up Microsoft’s Bing, Yahoo or DuckDuckGo in the browser to use an alternative search engine.

The Justice Department’s Kenneth Dintzer alleged earlier on Tuesday that in addition to the payments, Google manipulated auctions for ads placed on the Internet to raise prices for advertisers.

MEASUREMENTS

“Defaults are powerful, scale matters, and Google illegally held a monopoly for over a decade,” Dintzer said. As a result, without serious competition, Google innovated less and paid less attention to other concerns, such as privacy, he said.

Dintzer also said the department found evidence that Google had taken steps to protect communications about payments it made to companies like Apple. “They knew these deals were anti-competitive,” he said.

He showed a conversation where Google CEO Sundar Pichai asked to turn off the history function.

William Cavanaugh, speaking on behalf of states led by Colorado, focused on claims that Google refused to give Microsoft access to the Google Marketing Platform SA360 features, claiming it did so for financial reasons.

The government’s first witness was Google economist Hal Varian, who was asked about discussions within the company in the mid-to-early 2000s about the importance of Google becoming the default home page.

“I think there’s value in generally getting an assumption,” he said.

The trial opened to a packed federal court in Washington. The experiment is expected to last up to 10 weeks and in two phases. In the first case, Judge Amit Mehta will decide whether Google has violated competition law in controlling search and search advertising.

If Google is found to have violated the law, Judge Mehta will decide how best to resolve it. He can decide to simply order Google to stop practices he deems illegal, or order Google to sell assets.

In its appeal, the government asked for “necessary structural relief” but did not define it.

The legal battle has huge implications for Big Tech, which has been accused of buying up or strangling smaller rivals, but has been shielded from many accusations of violating competition law because the services the companies provide to users are free, as in the case of Google, or low-cost, as in the case of Amazon.com.

Previous major antitrust cases have included Microsoft, filed in 1998, and AT&T, filed in 1974. AT&T’s breakup in 1982 is credited with paving the way for the modern cell phone industry, while the battle over Microsoft opened the way for Google and others. on the internet.