Latest Development in Google Antitrust Case US Department of Justice Demands Multiple Decentralization Measures Including Sharing AI Training Data
The game “Monopoly” that we used to play as children is actually called “Monopoly” in English, which means monopoly. The gameplay of Monopoly involves giving each player the same amount of money and rolling the dice to move forward. When a player lands on a property, they can buy it and build houses to collect rent. In the end, there will only be one winner, and the player who owns more properties can drive their opponents into bankruptcy. This is the terrifying aspect of market monopoly, where the winner takes all and the loser goes bankrupt.
If one understands the real meaning of the game “Monopoly” as the harm caused by market monopoly, one would understand why both the United States and the European Union have imposed heavy fines on companies that engage in market monopolies in recent years, and why they have intervened to protect fair competition between businesses. Monopoly leaves no space for other operators to survive. From a macro perspective, monopolistic practices not only do not benefit the overall ecosystem, but also reduce per capita GDP and overall development.
According to a report by Reuters on October 8th, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) may ask a judge to force Google’s parent company, Alphabet, to split off part of its business. In August, a judge ruled that Google’s 80% share of the online search advertising business constituted illegal monopoly.
The DOJ has also proposed a possible measure to provide Google’s competitors with access to Google’s search index and AI models to prevent Google from monopolizing AI data. Google is currently actively fighting the court’s ruling, but it seems to have found no further reasons to refute it.
Google is currently fighting three cases against the Department of Justice, including the unresolved Ad Tech case. Future developments will continue to be tracked and reported.
The US Department of Justice has proposed multiple measures to require Google to remedy its existing business model. This includes terminating the practice of setting Google Chrome as the default search engine on new phones or computers. Google pays up to $26.3 billion annually to manufacturers, including Apple, to ensure its dominance in the search engine market. This remedy would allow Americans to have the freedom to search data without being bound to Google.
Judge James Donato of San Francisco ordered Google to open up its App to more users and not restrict users from making payments through third-party competitors to Google based on the jury’s verdict.
In 2020, Fortnite game developer Epic Games filed a lawsuit against Google, accusing Google of monopolizing the freedom of consumers to download apps on the Android system and interfering with consumers’ payment methods. In December 2023, Epic Games convinced the jury and the court issued an order prohibiting Google from controlling the distribution and payment functions of apps, stating that Google hindered the development of game developers and squeezed profits.
Judge Donato’s injunction includes Google not being able to prohibit payment methods for apps within three years and restricts revenue sharing between the Google Play store and apps.
The court rulings for the Google advertising search monopoly case and the Google Play store monopoly case have been issued, and the Department of Justice has even helped Google propose remedial measures to prevent Google from paying exorbitant damages. Google is currently preparing to appeal, mainly focusing on the defense that Google’s services are based on consumer interests and denying any monopolistic behavior.
Food search websites like Yelp strongly support the court’s ruling. Yelp has also filed complaints against Google and wants to break away from Google’s search engine. Users usually search for food on Google and then go to Yelp to read reviews. For thematic search websites, Google restricts traffic and takes away internet users.
To echo the previous quote, the prototype of the game Monopoly was invented by Elizabeth J. Magie Phillips. The essence of the game is to remind players of the potential future poverty caused by excessive greed. In the business market, there are still many capitalists who are willing to do whatever it takes to monopolize all businesses.
Google is a search tool that most people rely on. When Google prioritizes commercial profits, it is not just a matter of suppressing local businesses’ rankings or suppressing other operators. It concerns the original purpose of users, which is to find real and useful information, rather than just seeing search results that are pushed to the top because of payment. Over-commercialization consumes and harms not businesses, but the internet users who expect Google to bring convenience to their lives.
We hope that the Google monopoly case can bring about change and prevent internet search from becoming a tool for the benefit of a few.
