In a landmark decision, a federal court has ruled that Google violated antitrust laws by maintaining its search engine monopoly through exclusive deals and anticompetitive practices. This ruling marks the first major antitrust victory for the government against a tech giant in over two decades.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta’s ruling highlights Google’s use of exclusive agreements with companies like Apple and Samsung, which made Google the default search engine on their devices. The court found that these deals significantly contributed to Google’s dominance, allowing it to maintain a near-monopoly with a 90 percent share of internet search and a 95 percent share of mobile search.
Judge Mehta concluded that Google’s monopolistic behavior was evident in its exclusionary practices. The court found that Google engaged in anticompetitive conduct to lock in distribution channels and block rival search engines from gaining market traction. These exclusive agreements with phone manufacturers and browser developers, according to the ruling, prevented competitors from achieving the scale necessary to challenge Google and stifled innovation in the search market.
The ruling is a result of a lawsuit filed in 2020 by the Justice Department, along with 11 states, which alleged that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The lawsuit accused Google of using its market power to secure deals that favored its search engine and disadvantaged its rivals.
The court is expected to decide on remedies in the coming months, which could include structural changes such as divestitures or modifications to Google’s business practices.
In its defense, Google argued that its dominance was a result of offering superior products and services. The company highlighted that it spent approximately $26 billion in 2021 on traffic acquisition costs, emphasizing the significant revenue generated from its default search engine placements. Google estimated that losing its default status on devices like iPhones and Samsung phones could result in substantial revenue losses, potentially up to $33 billion.
The ruling echoes previous antitrust cases, such as the high-profile dispute between Apple and Epic Games, where some anticompetitive practices were challenged but did not result in a complete overhaul of Apple’s business model. However, this decision represents a significant moment in regulating the digital advertising and search markets, potentially reshaping how tech giants operate and compete.
