Federal Judge Amit Mehta issued a stark decision in the Justice Department’s lawsuit against Google on Monday: “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.”
It was the culmination of an antitrust lawsuit that the Justice Department filed against Google in 2020, which was joined by 38 state attorneys general. The government accused Google of illegally orchestrating its business dealings to ensure its search engine stayed on top. After a 10-week trial last fall and closing arguments in May, Judge Mehta has concluded that Google did act illegally.
“For more than 15 years, one general search engine has stood above the rest: Google,” Mehta wrote in his 286-page ruling. “The brand is synonymous with search.”
It was the first major antitrust lawsuit against a tech company to make to trial in decades. It centers on the way that tech companies have been able to amass power, and control the products people now use daily in their lives. As other government antitrust suits have gotten underway, Mehta’s ruling could have a lasting effect on how tech giants are able to do business in the future.
“No company – no matter how large or influential – is above the law,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. “The Justice Department will continue to vigorously enforce our antitrust laws.”
Google says it’s appealing the decision
Shortly after Mehta issued his decision, Google said it would appeal his ruling.
“This decision recognizes that Google offers the best search engine, but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available,” Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, said in a statement. “As this process continues, we will remain focused on making products that people find helpful and easy to use.”
Google controls around 90% of the U.S. search engine market. To fight this lawsuit, the company put together a massive legal team and brought on outside law firms to help argue its case. Google’s legal arguments hinged on the company saying its search product is superior to competitors and that’s why it dominates the industry.
During the trial, the two sides battled it out. Top Silicon Valley executives from Google and rival companies testified, including Google CEO Sundar Pichai and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. Troves of internal documents were introduced; and arguments erupted over redacted evidence, closed-door testimony and alleged destruction of employee chat logs.
Google’s lucrative agreements with device makers
Mehta’s decision focused on exclusive agreements that Google made with device makers. During trial it was revealed that Google has paid billions of dollars a year to phone makers, like Apple and Samsung, and web browsers, like Mozilla, which runs Firefox.
Those deals meant Google got the prize spot of being the default search engine on those companies’ devices and products.
In 2021, Google spent a total of $26.3 billion to ensure it was the default search engine, according to witness testimony during the trial. Apple, which had the most lucrative deal, was paid around $18 billion that same year, according to the New York Times.
Mehta wrote in his opinion that these agreements meant that Google had “a major, largely unseen advantage over its rivals.”
DuckDuckGo is a much smaller rival. Kamyl Bazbaz, the company’s senior vice president of public affairs, said she applauds the landmark decision.
“The journey ahead will be long,” Bazbaz said. “However, we know there is a pent up demand for alternatives in search and this ruling will support access to more options.”
Next steps for Google and other Big Tech companies
Mehta’s ruling didn’t come with sanctions for Google. Another trial will take place where remedies will be issued. Those could range from fines to Google being forced to restructure.
George Hay, a law professor at Cornell University and former chief of commerce for the Justice Department’s antitrust division, said it’s pretty clear what the judge will mandate.
“The remedy here is pretty obvious,” Hay said. “He's going to say those contracts with Apple and Samsung have to go away.”
Remedies will likely be a long way off — that's because all of the case’s appeals must be resolved before Google is forced to make any changes to its business practices.
The lawsuit against Google is just one of several recently brought by the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission. The government has sued Amazon, Apple and Facebook parent Meta over business practices the government says hurts both rivals and consumers.
Bill Kovacic, an antitrust law professor at the George Washington University Law School and a former chair of the Federal Trade Commission, said this win by the Justice Department could pave the way for those other lawsuits.
“It's a crucial foundation for the government's current effort to prosecute misconduct by dominant tech companies,” he said.
Editor's note: Google, Apple and DuckDuckGo are among NPR's financial supporters.
Transcript
MICHEL MARTIN, HOST:
The Justice Department won an historic victory against Google in an antitrust lawsuit. A federal judge ruled that Google acted illegally to ensure the company dominated the search engine market.
A MARTÍNEZ, HOST:
NPR's tech correspondent Dara Kerr is here to talk about how monumental this decision is and what it could mean for the future of Google. Dara, it sounds like a big loss for Google. Tell us more about the judge's ruling.
DARA KERR, BYLINE: Yeah, it was a big blow. So this is the first major antitrust lawsuit against a tech company to go to trial in decades. If you remember, the last one was against Microsoft in the 1990s, and the government won that case. So for this Google case, the Justice Department used Microsoft as a template, and it worked. In his nearly 300-page ruling, Judge Amit Mehta straight out called Google a monopolist, and he said it acted illegally to make sure it stayed a monopoly. He noted in his ruling how Google was once a scrappy startup, founded by two Stanford students in a rented garage, and now has become one of the world's most valuable companies. And he suggested that dominance wasn't by accident. When I called up former chair of the Federal Trade Commission Bill Kovacic, he could not overstate how important this ruling was.
BILL KOVACIC: It's a very significant outcome for the Department of Justice - not just for U.S. policy but for global efforts to control Big Tech.
KERR: So the ripple effects, A, could be very huge here.
MARTÍNEZ: Yeah. And the judge you mentioned called Google a monopolist. So what does that mean for the company going forward?
KERR: Yeah, Google was quick to say it's appealing the ruling. The company's president of global affairs said in a statement that Google is the best search engine, and the judge recognized that. But the judge also said that Google had a major advantage over its rivals. That advantage is exclusive agreements with device-makers like Apple and Samsung. Google has paid those companies billions of dollars to be the default search engine on their phones and computers.
During the trial, we learned that in one year alone, Google paid more than $26 billion for that privilege. So now, going forward, it's hard to know what's going to happen to Google, and that's because, in his decision, the judge didn't address remedies for the company. Instead, there's going to be a whole separate other trial where he will decide those. I spoke to one of the top antitrust experts in the country, George Hay, about what the judge might mandate. Hay is a former chief economist for the Justice Department's Antitrust Division.
GEORGE HAY: The remedy here is pretty obvious. He's going to say those contracts with Apple and Samsung have to go away.
KERR: No contracts means Google likely won't be the default search engine, but Hay says we're a long way from that because of the whole appeals process.
MARTÍNEZ: OK. Now, beyond Google, though, Dara, I mean, what does Monday's ruling mean for other lawsuits the government has brought against Big Tech?
KERR: Yeah, well, there are a lot of lawsuits. The Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission have sued Facebook parent company Meta. And there's Amazon, and they've sued Apple and some other small tech companies, too. And it's clear the Justice Department is emboldened by this ruling and celebrating their win against Google. In a statement, Attorney General Merrick Garland said, quote, "no company, no matter how large or influential, is above the law." And the experts I spoke to agree. They say this ruling could pave the way for similar rulings on those other lawsuits, so this push to break up the power of Big Tech seems like something that's just going to continue.
MARTÍNEZ: All right. That's NPR tech correspondent Dara Kerr. Thanks, Dara.
KERR: Thank you.
MARTÍNEZ: And a note here - Google is a financial sponsor of NPR, but we cover them like we would anyone else. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
300x250 Ad
300x250 Ad