Menu Menu
[gtranslate]

Google’s five-year antitrust lawsuit results in a slap on the wrist

Google has finally seen the end to a lawsuit filed way back in 2020 and a trial that began in 2023. The Department of Justice alleged that Google held a monopoly over the search and advertising market, but it’s gotten away with a slap on the wrist.

After years of legal foreplay, a US judge has finally ruled on whether Google’s stranglehold on search is technically unfair or just annoyingly effective. The result? Some tweaks, a few stern words, and absolutely no structural changes to the company that’s essentially indexed our lives for more than 25 years.

Having been reluctantly dragged into legal proceedings in 2020 by the Department of Justice and 11 state attorney generals, Alphabet executives have sweated over the possibility of harsh sanctions intended to diminish Google’s popularity and visibility.

In reality, however, it’s pretty much business as usual after the knocking of the mallet, and Google’s stock has actually jumped 8% overnight, as investors jubilantly celebrate getting off scot-free.

The crux of the lawsuit was that Google had consistently shown anti-competitive behaviour, consolidating its monopoly on the search engine business by flexing its immense resources and wealth to strategically oust rivals.

The straw that broke the camel’s back was Google’s partnership with Apple, in which the former paid tens-of-billions every year to remain as the default search engine across iPhone and Safari.

Five years on, it’s this type of exclusive deal that is now off the table, kind of. Google can still pay Apple and other tech firms to feature its search — it just can’t demand exclusivity, which sounds a lot like renting a billboard next to every road and insisting it’s just good marketing.

As a token gesture toward fairness, the judge also told Google to share some of its search index and user interaction data with other companies (basically Bing, let’s be honest), but how that will be negotiated and whether Google will show any appetite to cooperate remains unclear.

Despite the Department of Justice’s push for a more aggressive remedy, like separating Chrome from Google entirely, the judge decided against anything drastic. Chrome stays, Android stays, and the general vibe of Google being inescapable remains unchanged.

In response, Google released a statement gently patting itself on the back for all the innovation and consumer choice it ‘authentically’ fosters. It’s also appealing the ruling through a higher governing body, saying any proposed monopoly exists because its service is the best – not because of eye-watering handouts. Hmm.

The new rules will hang around for six years minimum, which is roughly one AI generation or two Google messaging apps. In that time, competitors will be allowed to exist slightly more visibly, provided they aren’t usurped by an army of AI-based browsers or operating systems, that is.

Of course, none of this means your daily internet habits will change. You’ll still Google search cold symptoms on your iPhone, in Chrome, using a keyboard that autocompletes your thoughts before your brain has even fleshed them out.

The monopoly’s still very much there. It’s just been asked to stop literally eating the other animals in the farmyard.

Accessibility