EDITORIAL: Over the last two decades, it would have been difficult for anyone venturing online to avoid the overarching presence of Google, which has become the primary gateway to the internet for millions around the world through its ubiquitous hold over the search engine market.
Now, one of the most powerful companies in the world is facing what many consider to be the most significant setback of its 26 years of existence, with a US federal court ruling on August 6 that Google built its internet search empire through maintaining a global monopoly over search services and advertising by breaking American antitrust laws.
The case had seen the US justice department suing Google for sabotaging competition by spending billions each year on contracts to providers such as Apple and Samsung in a bid to become the default search engine on their devices. In 2021, for example, Google had paid more than $26 billion to Apple alone to remain the default search option on its Safari browser.
Moreover, it had been alleged that the tech giant – which dominates between 90-95 percent of the search market – had maintained its position through “serial acquisitions”, blocking almost every avenue through which consumers might find an alternative search engine.
This ruling will now be followed by another trial that will determine the actions the US government could take against Google, which could range from mandating changes in how it handles its contracts with companies like Apple and Samsung to more substantial actions that could even include breaking up of the company. However, as Google plans to appeal the verdict, and given the vast resources at its disposal, it could be a while before it faces any serious consequences.
Even so, the significance of this ruling should not be underestimated. The lawsuit by the US government was part of a larger recent trend of American and European authorities increasing their scrutiny of monopolistic practices by global technology giants, and the ruling has the potential to determine the pattern for other similar antitrust cases currently in progress.
One of the more significant ones involves Meta, which has been accused of acquiring WhatsApp and Instagram to stymie competition from other social media platforms, while another one charges Amazon with preventing its sellers from offering lower prices on other platforms and prioritising its own products over third-party products.
It is clear that governments worldwide have struggled to curb the questionable practices of big tech companies, as regulatory agencies have not kept pace with rapidly evolving technology and business models, often being staffed by individuals lacking the necessary experience and insight to fully understand the myriad ways technology can be leveraged to undermine fair business practices and essential societal structures. This inadequate scrutiny has led to an unbridled increase in big tech’s power and influence, and on many an occasion has undermined democracy, privacy rights and other fundamental societal institutions.
Any hopes that the US court’s ruling will prove to be a harbinger for transformative change, however, will have to be checked for now given past experience. In 1999, Microsoft was found similarly guilty of creating a monopoly, and a year later a court ordered the company to be broken up.
Microsoft appealed the decision, which was upheld and later in 2002, it agreed to a financial settlement with the US justice department, bringing the matter to a close but without there being a truly fundamental change in how it conducted business.
One hopes though that given the much more powerful role that technology companies now play in moulding society, actions that truly curb their unconstrained influence are not avoided this time around.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2024
Comments
Comments are closed.