Here's Why Google Losing the Antitrust Case Matters, According to a Market Insights Expert The judge presiding over the case called Google a "monopolist."
By Sherin Shibu Edited by Melissa Malamut
Key Takeaways
- A federal judge ruled on Monday that Google acted anticompetitively in a four-year legal battle with the Department of Justice.
- Damian Rollison, director of market insights at AI marketing company SOCi, told Entrepreneur that the decision is "the most concrete signal to date" that anticompetitive conduct could affect Google's business.
- The ruling paves the way for pending DOJ antitrust cases against Big Tech companies.
Four years after the U.S. Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google, the judge presiding over the case has reached a decision: "Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly."
Judge Amit Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled on Monday that Google violated section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which makes anticompetitive behavior illegal. The ruling called out Google's multi-billion-dollar agreements with Apple, Samsung, and Mozilla to make its search engine the default on their products, labeling the partnerships "exclusive" and "anticompetitive."
Judge Amit Mehta, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Though Google has stated that it plans to appeal the decision, the case marks an important turning point, according to Damian Rollison, director of market insights at AI marketing company SOCi.
"[The] decision represents the most concrete signal to date that antitrust activity may ultimately impact Google's business and the role the company plays in the lives of so many consumers," Rollison told Entrepreneur.
Rollison added that he didn't think Google's dominance in search, with over 90% of the global market, would bother most people, but that dominance is now under threat. Google faces AI competitors, such as Perplexity and OpenAI's SearchGPT, with its legal challenges. There have also been user complaints about Google's low search quality.
"Google has argued and will continue to argue that its dominance is due to product superiority," Rollison stated. "This was true in its initial phase of growth to become the leading search engine, but is arguably no longer such a defensible position."
Rollison stated that Google had a history of preferring itself and its own services in search results.
Related: The U.S. Justice Department Is Suing Apple in a Groundbreaking iPhone Monopoly Lawsuit — Here's Why
"When's the last time you went to a dedicated website to look up the meaning of a word?" Rollison asked.
Search results that provide information and answers to travel, shopping, and local questions "are provided directly by Google on Google-owned search pages with Google-owned properties, monetized via Google-owned ad placements," he said.
Google's self-preferential search world could change because of the ruling: The tech giant may have to separate its search business from ads, for example, according to Rollison. With the appeal and the penalty yet to be decided, it could take months to know how this court decision affects Google.
Still, the ruling sets a precedent for pending DOJ antitrust cases against Big Tech companies, including one against Apple.
Related: I Worked at Google for 14 Years — Here's What I Had to Unlearn When I Started My Own Company
