Judge Amit Mehta ruled in the summer that Google abused its dominant position in the search market with illegal monopolistic conduct. That was only, however, the first part of the trial. Now it is time to litigate what are the appropriate remedies to fight this conduct and the Department of Justice put its cards on the table on Tuesday. In a document registered with the court, prosecutors propose far-reaching measures to remedy Google’s violations on several fronts. They anticipate that structural measures will be proposed, which may involve the sale or separation of part of the technology giant’s business.
They also handle prohibiting agreements that involve installing Google’s search engine by default in other browsers (including those on iPhones) and requiring the company to give access to the underlying data it uses to build its search results and search products. artificial intelligence.
“The plaintiffs are considering behavioral and structural remedies that would prevent Google from using products like Chrome [su navegador]Play [su tienda de aplicaciones] and Android [su sistema operativo] to favor Google search and Google search-related products and features—including emerging search hotspots and features, such as artificial intelligence—over rivals or new entrants, says the writing, which has a total of 32 pages, but only 10 of effective content. The rest are the cover and 21 pages of signatures, since the text is signed by the legal representatives of the States that sued Google together with the Department of Justice.
Google responded through his blog that the Justice Department’s initial proposal to reform the search engine market is “radical and sweeping” and could have “unintended negative consequences for American innovation and consumers.” It indicates that forcing Google to share search queries, clicks and results with competitors puts users’ privacy and security at risk. and, above all, he indicates that “separating Chrome or Android would break them, and it would break many other things.” “We have invested billions of dollars in Chrome and Android,” says Google. “Make no mistake: separating them would change their business models, increase the cost of the devices and weaken Android and Google Play in their strong competition with the iPhone and Apple’s App Store,” he adds.
Stall movement
That of the Department of Justice is the first major move in a new legal battle that will last for months. The prosecutors themselves remember that, according to the schedule set, they will refine their proposals first in November and then in March of next year. “Google’s illegal conduct persisted for more than a decade and involved a series of self-reinforcing tactics. “Undoing such illegal behavior and achieving the objectives of an effective antitrust remedy requires time, information (particularly given the information asymmetries between the plaintiffs and Google) and careful consideration,” the brief warns.
A decision from Judge Mehta in this case is not expected until summer of next year. In parallel, another trial is being held against Google in which the Department of Justice accuses the company of exercising a triple monopoly in the digital advertising market.
Prosecutors argue that once Google has been found to have violated antitrust laws in the search market, the remedy for its violations should free these markets from the company’s exclusionary conduct, eliminate obstacles to competition, deny the company the fruits of its violations and prevent it from monopolizing these and related markets in the future.
To this end, the plaintiffs are studying solutions to address four categories of damages: those related to Google’s search distribution and revenue sharing agreements; with the accumulation and use of data; with the generation and display of search results, and with the scale and monetization of advertising.
Drastic measures
The most drastic measures affect distribution channels and income sharing agreements, prosecutors are considering prohibiting default agreements from being limited or prohibited (such as those that allow you to be the search engine in iPhone and iPad browsers). Apple), pre-installation agreements, and other search-related revenue sharing agreements. But, in addition, those structural and behavioral measures are proposed that prevent Google from using products such as Chrome, Play and Android to benefit its searches, which would open the door to a sale of assets, a division or separate management.
In relation to the accumulation and use of data, the plaintiffs are exploring solutions that would prohibit Google from using or retaining data that cannot be effectively shared with others for privacy reasons and also other remedies that would reduce the cost and complexity of indexing or retaining data for rival general search engines.
In the third section, the generation and display of search results, the remedies may put obstacles in the way of the development of Google’s artificial intelligence tools, since they propose requiring the search engine to allow websites crawled for the search to opt out. serve for training or not appear in any Google-owned artificial intelligence products or features.
Regarding the scale and monetization of advertising, the fourth section, the plaintiffs are studying solutions for text advertising in general searches that will create more competition and reduce barriers to entry. This extreme goes hand in hand with the other antitrust case for which Google is being tried.
Avoid non-compliance
Even that does not end the list of remedies that the Department of Justice and its allies are considering demanding and that, if addressed by the judge, could turn Google’s management into a regulatory hell. In this Tuesday’s text, prosecutors indicate that an effective remedy requires protections against evasion and retaliation, even through novel means. As a result, prosecutors are considering additional remedies.
Google has already said it plans to appeal Judge Mehta’s decision, but must wait until a concrete ruling is issued before doing so. The case could still be entangled in the courts for many years.
On Monday, another federal judge ordered Google to open its app store for the next three years to resolve another antitrust case, this time brought by Epic Games and related to its dominance of app distribution on Android smartphones. The company also plans to appeal that decision.
#United #States #division #Google #remedy #monopoly