Judge rules Google violated antitrust laws, paving way for potential breakup

The US judge ruled on Monday that Google broke antitrust laws by spending billions of dollars on creating an illegal monopoly for becoming the default search engine all over the world.

This can be counted as a major victory for federal authorities in their battle to challenge Big Tech's market dominance.

According to the summary, US District Judge Amit Mehta of Washington, D.C., says that "Google is a monopolist and has taken steps to sustain its monopoly."

Google now has some 90 per cent of the internet search market and 95 per cent of the smartphone search market.

The ruling clears the path to a second trial to determine the remedies, including breaking up Google's parent company, Alphabet.

That would dramatically remake the landscape for online advertising that, for years, Google has dominated.

The ruling is seen as an open-ended passport for hawks in US anti-trust enforcement against Big Tech—a sector now under scrutiny from both flanks of the political spectrum.

US Attorney General Merrick Garland hailed the verdict as historic for the American people, touting that no company is above the law.

On these lines, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre spun the pro-competition ruling as a win, stressing how Americans deserve an internet that is free, fair, and open to competition.

Alphabet said it would appeal against the ruling. The business said the ruling recognised Google had developed the best search engine but unfairly prevented it from making it easily available to consumers.

Alphabet shares slid 4.5 per cent on Monday as part of a broader slide in tech stocks following recession fears.

In 2023, Google advertising accounted for 77 per cent of Alphabet's overall sales.

He pointed out that it had paid out $26.3 billion in 2021 alone to ensure that its search engine remained the default on smartphones and browsers.

He noted the worth of default search settings. At that rate, losing such defaults would have a big impact on Google's revenues.

For example, if it lost the Safari default, there would be an estimated major drop in queries and billions lost in revenues.

It is the first major ruling in several cases alleging Big Tech monopolies. The Trump administration filed the Google search case, the first such case in a generation.

Federal antitrust regulators also have sued Meta Platforms, Amazon, and Apple, alleging the tech giants maintain illegal monopolies.

These cases began under former President Donald Trump's administration and enjoy robust bipartisan support for antitrust enforcement.

According to Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, the Democrat who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee's antitrust subcommittee, the case moving through two administrations showed strong bipartisan support for antitrust enforcement.

She said that it was a big victory, saying further that antitrust enforcement is the key to keeping competition alive. She termed Google as a rampant monopolist, saying this ruling was important for the American people.

The implications for Google and the wider tech industry remain as the legal process continues, with potential appeals to the US Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court.

Forcing Google to divest its search business would cut Alphabet from its largest source of revenue. That could prove harmful if it's no longer able to strike exclusive default agreements.

Per Emarketer senior analyst Evelyn Mitchell-Wolf, there would be a delay in any immediate effects on consumers if this were to go through a protracted legal process.