Source : INDIA TODAY NEWS
A historic legal showdown is unfolding in Washington, where the US government is pushing for the most drastic change ever to one of the world’s most powerful tech companies: Google. At the heart of the case is the accusation that Google abused its dominance in internet search — and now, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) says breaking the company up may be the only way to restore fair competition online. Here’s everything you need to know, in 5 key points.
advertisement
-Why is Google on trial?
Last year, Judge Amit P Mehta ruled that Google had broken antitrust laws to protect its dominance in internet search. The court found that Google used its market power unfairly — such as by paying billions to companies like Apple and Samsung to make Google the default search engine on phones and web browsers. These deals helped Google stay at the top, not just because of its product quality, but because of the way it shut out rivals from gaining a foothold.
The judge called Google a “monopolist,” and the current trial is focused on what to do about it. The government says Google’s behaviour has created a closed loop where it keeps growing stronger simply by being the default option, collecting more user data, and improving its results — which in turn brings in more money, allowing it to secure even more default placements.
advertisement
-What does the US government want to do?
The Justice Department is asking for bold and sweeping remedies to break this cycle. The most headline-grabbing proposal is for Google to sell off its Chrome web browser, which it says is a “gateway to search” and responsible for 35 per cent of all user queries. Chrome has more than 4 billion users globally, and forcing Google to divest it could drastically change how people access the internet.
The government also wants to ban Google from making default search engine deals, such as the $20 billion it reportedly pays Apple each year. These agreements are seen as a major barrier preventing rival search engines from competing fairly.
Another proposal is for Google to share its vast trove of search data — including its search index and results — with competitors. This would allow other companies to build better search products, but Google says it would be like giving away the company’s crown jewels. Its lawyers argue that such a move is dangerous and could expose users’ private information.
What is Google’s defence?
Google strongly disagrees with the government’s claims and says the proposed remedies are “extreme” and “fundamentally flawed.” The company argues it earned its place through hard work, innovation, and smart business decisions — such as investing early in mobile search. It believes that punishing it for success would set a dangerous precedent.
Google’s legal team claims that banning default deals and forcing data sharing would actually hurt competition. They say rivals would simply copy Google’s work without having made the same investments, and that such measures could discourage future innovation. Google also insists that Chrome is not a standalone business and only makes sense as part of its broader ecosystem.
What could change for users?
If the judge agrees with the government’s proposals, the way people use the internet could look very different in a few years. Without default deals, users might be asked to choose a search engine when setting up their device — rather than being automatically directed to Google.
If Chrome is sold off, it may become a separate company or be acquired by another tech giant, possibly altering how the browser functions or how tightly it integrates with Google Search. This could open up more space for alternative browsers and search engines to compete.
Perhaps most significantly, if rivals gain access to Google’s data, we could see a surge in new search engines, chatbots, or AI tools built using that information. This could spur more innovation — or, as Google fears, lead to copycat products with fewer safety measures.
What’s at stake beyond search?
This case is about more than just search engines. It’s about how the internet works — and who controls it. Google’s dominance in search has helped it grow into a $1.8 trillion company with deep influence across ads, mobile software (Android), online video (YouTube), and now AI.
Other parts of Google’s business have already been found to be monopolies. A judge recently ruled its ad tech tools are illegal monopolies, and in 2023, a jury found its app store also violated antitrust laws. The current trial is a chance for regulators to draw a line — not just for Google, but for other tech giants watching closely.
AI is also part of the conversation. The Justice Department has warned that Google is applying its old playbook to its new AI tools, like Gemini. If left unchecked, regulators argue, Google could dominate the AI market just as it did with search.
Google counters that the AI field is highly competitive, pointing to the rise of OpenAI and its viral product ChatGPT. It argues that the market is already evolving, and that heavy-handed regulation could slow progress.
What’s next?
Judge Mehta is expected to make a decision on remedies by late summer. Whatever the outcome, this case could shape the future of technology — not just in the US, but around the world. Will Google be broken up? Will it be forced to change how it does business? Or will the court decide that its dominance is simply the result of playing fair and winning?
For now, the battle lines are drawn. The world is watching.
Tune In
SOURCE :- TIMES OF INDIA
