United States v. Google LLC (2020)

Last updated

United States v. Google LLC
Seal of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.png
Court United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Full case name United States, State of Arkansas, State of Florida, State of Georgia, State of Indiana, Commonwealth of Kentucky, State of Louisiana, State of Mississippi, State of Missouri, State of Montana, State of South Carolina and State of Texas v. Google LLC
StartedOctober 20, 2020
DecidedAugust 5, 2024
Holding
Google LLC violates Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
Court membership
Judge sitting Amit P. Mehta

United States v. Google LLC is an ongoing federal antitrust case brought by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) against Google LLC on October 20, 2020. The suit alleges that Google has violated the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 by illegally monopolizing the search engine and search advertising markets, most notably on Android devices, as well as with Apple and mobile carriers. [1] [2]

Contents

The case was heard started in September 2023 in the District Court for the District of Columbia with judge Amit Mehta presiding. [3] Mehta ruled in August 2024, finding that Google held a monopoly on their search engine technology, and illegally used that position in securing Google's position with mobile device and website partners. [4] [5] Proceedings to determine what remedies will be placed on Google are still to be held.

The lawsuit has been described as a "blockbuster antitrust trial", [6] and has been widely described as one of the most important federal antitrust lawsuit against a high-tech company since the United States v. Microsoft Corp. case in 1998. [7] Legal commentators anticipate that there will likely be an appeal, regardless of how the case is decided. [8] The outcome of the case is considered to have a potential bearing on the subsequently-filed federal antitrust suits against fellow "Big Tech" companies Meta Platforms, Amazon, and Apple. [9] [10] [11] The DOJ filed a second antitrust lawsuit against Google over the company's advertising market practices in 2023. [12]

Background

The rapid growth of the U.S. tech industry in the 1990s led to concerns about potential for anti-competitive behavior in the sector. [13] This ultimately led to the federal government launching an antitrust suit against Microsoft, alleging that the company unfairly hindered competition. [7]

In the 2010s, concerns about potential anti-competitive behavior by "Big Tech" (Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta) companies became subject to lawmaker scrutiny. On October 6, 2020, the Democratic majority staff on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law released a nearly 450-page report following a 16-month long investigation concluding that the companies wield "monopoly power". [14]

Prior antitrust scrutiny of Google

In 2008, scrutiny by the DOJ and the Canadian Competition Bureau scrutiny of an advertising deal between Google and Yahoo! led the companies to abandon their agreement. According to the DOJ, the "agreement between these two companies accounting for 90 percent or more of each relevant market" would have likely harmed "competition in the markets for Internet search advertising and Internet search syndication". [15]

The DOJ lawsuit alleges that Google Search holds an unlawful monopoly in the search engine market Google web search.png
The DOJ lawsuit alleges that Google Search holds an unlawful monopoly in the search engine market

In 2011, members of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted to demand information from Google as part of an antitrust inquiry into the company's search engine practices. Following a nineteen-month investigation, FTC staff attorneys recommended that the agency bring forth an antitrust lawsuit against Google. However, the members of the commissioners ultimately declined this recommendation, and voted on January 3, 2013, to close the investigation. [16]

During the 2010s, the European Commission engaged in antitrust scrutiny of Google, leading to the company being found guilty of competition law breaches in three separate cases. [17] The United States v. Google lawsuit has been specifically compared to the European Commission's lawsuit against Google's Android practices. [18]

Proceedings

Launch of lawsuit and initial response (2020)

The Department of Justice (DOJ) formally brought the case on October 20, 2020, in conjunction with state attorneys general representing the following states: Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Texas. [2]

Makan Delrahim, then serving as Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Antitrust Division, had recused himself during the probe earlier in the year due to his past professional work for Google. [19]

Allegations

In United States v. Google LLC, the federal government alleges that Google has unfairly hindered competition in the search market through anti-competitive deals with Apple as well as mobile carriers. [1] The government alleges that, as a result of these practices, Google has accumulated control of around 88% of the domestic search engine market.

In doing so, the government alleges, Google has additionally monopolized the search advertising market at the expense of competing services. [20] Per the government's estimation, Google has been able to accumulate control of over 70% of the search advertising market. [7] As a result of lack of competition, Google has been able to over-charge advertisers versus what they would pay in a competitive environment. [21]

Pre-trial proceedings and developments (2020–2023)

Jonathan Kanter (pictured) succeeded Makan Delrahim, who served under Trump, as Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division in 2021. Jonathan Kanter, Assistant Attorney General.jpg
Jonathan Kanter (pictured) succeeded Makan Delrahim, who served under Trump, as Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division in 2021.

Owing to the accusation that Google engaged in anti-competitive conduct through exclusivity dealings with Apple, it was reported in February 2022 that the government was looking to depose "Apple's most senior executives". [22] On December 12, 2022, Google asked the court to toss out the case, arguing that it fairly achieved its dominant market share and that the DOJ's argument "relies on dubious antitrust arguments." [23]

As of 2023, Google is represented in the case by attorneys from Williams & Connolly, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, and Ropes & Gray. [24] On August 4, 2023, Judge Mehta ruled Google will not face allegations the search engine prioritized associated products over competitors in the trial, but will allow allegations over Google's use of anti-competitive contracts dealing with Search and Android to go to trial. [25]

In February 2023, the DOJ accused Google of destroying evidence relevant to the lawsuit, and requested that Google be formally sanctioned. [26] [27] The DOJ alleged that Google employees used an internal chat service with "autodelete" settings prior to and during the course of the lawsuit. [28] According to the DOJ, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure meant that Google should have ceased the use of auto-deletion of employee chat messages as early as May 2019 in anticipation of a federal lawsuit. Similar accusations were made in the Epic Games v. Google antitrust case. [29]

Efforts to recuse Jonathan Kanter

Following the confirmation of Jonathan Kanter as Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Antitrust Division, Google questioned Kanter's impartiality in the case given his past work for rival companies. [30]

Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe criticized Google's claims, arguing they have "little legal basis and strain common sense". [31] In May 2022, it was reported that Kanter would be barred from working on the case as the DOJ considers mandating his recusal. [32]

Google's demands that Kanter recuse himself was met with criticism from politicians from both major parties. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), a Democrat, accused Google of engaging in bullying tactics. [33] Kanter was ultimately cleared by the DOJ to participate in the department's scrutiny of Google in January 2023. [34]

Trial (2023–2024)

The trial started on September 12, 2023. [35] [3] In its opening statements, the DOJ accused Google of unlawfully maintaining a monopoly in the search engine market as early as 2010. [36] Google has defended itself from these accusations, with the company arguing that the high quality of its search products allows it to maintain a dominant position in the market. [37]

During the trial, Judge Mehta received criticism for closing courtroom access for certain testimonies in the case and for delaying the release of public documents pertaining to the case. [38] [39] Media companies including Bloomberg News filed a motion to increase public trial access. [40] Following a week of deliberations between both parties, Mehta decided on September 27 that the DOJ would be permitted to publicly release documents shown in the trial. [41]

Much of the trial centered on Google's deal with Apple to have Google search as the default option on the Safari web browser. [42] [43] Witnesses from Google, Verizon and Samsung testified about the impact of Google's annual payments of approximately $10 billion to maintain default status for Google search. [44] Following the culmination of the government's case in the week of October 19, 2023, Google began its defense in court on October 26. [45] The trial ended up concluding on November 16, 2023. [46]

Following the trial, Judge Mehta announced that closing arguments in the suit would be held in May 2024, and indicated he was uncertain as to how he would end up ruling in the case. [47] Attorneys from both sides reconvened to make their arguments on May 3 and May 4, 2024. [48]

Reuters reported that legal analysts expect that there will likely be an appeal in the case, regardless of how it is decided. [8] How the case is ultimately decided is considered to potentially set precedent that could impact other federal antitrust suits against "Big Tech" companies (Meta Platforms, Amazon, and Apple). [9] [10]

Verdict

On August 5, 2024, Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in online search. [49] [50] After a hearing in September 2024, Mehta gave regulators until December 2024 to propose any penalties unto Google, and is likely to rule on those by August 2025. [51]

The DOJ submitted their proposal on how to remedy Google's search monopoly on November 20, requesting that Judge Mehta should force the company to sell their Chrome web browser and either sell the Android operating system or bar making Google services mandatory on Android devices. [52] [53] The government also requested Mehta to render Google unable to enter into agreements resulting in them automatically being the default search browser, as well as to share company data to rivals for a decade. [54] [55] Google has until December 20, 2024, to file their proposal, before a two-week remedies trial being held in April. [56]

Remedies trial

A trial will be held in April 2025 regarding potential remedies to fix Google's search monopoly, with a ruling by Judge Mehta expected by August 2025. [54]

Analysis and public interest

The case has attracted public interest amid scrutiny of the four Big Tech companies. United States v. Google LLC has been compared to the United States v. Microsoft Corp. (2002), a noted antitrust case against Microsoft. [57]

According to John Newman of the University of Miami School of Law, "U.S. v. Google might be the first big case against Big Tech, but it likely won't be the last." [58] Two months after United States v. Google was filed, the FTC would bring on an antitrust case against Facebook. [59]

Public opinion

Polling by advocacy group Demand Progress in October 2020 found that respondents across party lines support the suit by a 48% to 36% margin, with 52% of Republicans and 49% of Democrats found to be in support. [60] A survey of tech workers at various firms conducted by workplace app Blind in October 2020 found that 57% of tech employees polled believe the suit has merit, though only 13% of Google workers said the same. [61]

On September 12, 2023, Kent Walker, Google's President of Global Affairs and chief legal officer was followed by someone dressed up as Mr. Monopoly, as he went to attend the antitrust trial at federal court in Washington, D.C. [62]

Response from elected officials

Ted Cruz official 116th portrait.jpg
Elizabeth Warren, official portrait, 114th Congress.jpg
Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) spoke favorably about the lawsuit

Politico noted that the filing of the lawsuit received praise from both Democratic and Republican politicians. [63] Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) praised the DOJ for bringing forth a "legitimate, long-time-coming suit against Google for engaging in anti-competitive, manipulative, and often illegal conduct". [64]

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) also praised the lawsuit, arguing that "Google abuses its power not just in the search market by using its monopoly power to make billions, but it also uses it to try to censor the American People". [65] The suit received additional praise from Republican Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Josh Hawley (R-MO). [63]

Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN) criticized the timing of the case, which was filed just weeks before the 2020 presidential election. On Twitter, Cohen questioned the DOJ's decision to launch the suit so close to the election:

"Why did the #Trump Administration wait until TWO WEEKS before the election to file a lawsuit over #Google's monopoly power? Call me cynical, but if #antitrust enforcement was a real priority at #DOJ, why did they wait until now?"

In response to questions regarding the timing of the case, Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen defended the DOJ's timeframe, stating that though "we might have even preferred to be quicker", the DOJ sought to "make sure that we've done the work that's necessary" prior to bringing the case. [63]

Response from Google

Eric Schmidt, formerly CEO of both Google and parent company Alphabet Inc., criticized the lawsuit, stating that "There's a difference between dominance and excellence". [66] On Twitter, Google denied the DOJ's allegations, with the company stating that consumers use "Google because they choose to -- not because they're forced to or because they can't find alternatives." [67]

In December 2020, 38 states brought on a similar lawsuit against Google. Co-led by Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, the State of Colorado et al. v. Google LLC [68] case reportedly "goes beyond the DOJ's" in its scope of accusations, according to CNBC. [69]

In July 2021, attorneys general from 36 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.) launched an antitrust lawsuit alleging that Google has hindered competition in the app market through its Google Play store policies. [70] In September 2023, all fifty states as well as D.C. and Puerto Rico reportedly "reached an agreement in principle" to settle the case. [71]

In January 2023, the DOJ filed a second antitrust suit against Google centered on alleged anti-competitive conduct in the advertising technology (adtech) market. [72] A spokesperson for Google denied the allegations of the lawsuit and accused the DOJ of trying to "pick winners and losers in the highly competitive advertising technology sector.” [73] The trial began on September 9, 2024 and concluded on September 27, 2024.

Reportedly pending future lawsuits

In addition to both ongoing federal antitrust lawsuits against Google, it was reported in 2022 that the DOJ was in the process of investigating if Google has engaged in anti-competitive conduct through bundling its Google Maps service with company software. [74] In 2023, Politico reported that the probe focuses on the Google Automotive Services (GAS) offering provided to automakers, which includes the Maps service, the Play store, and Google's voice assistant. The probe also scrutinizes Google's control of location data through Google Maps. [75]

See also

Related Research Articles

<i>United States v. Microsoft Corp.</i> 2001 American antitrust law case

United States of America v. Microsoft Corporation, 253 F.3d 34, was a landmark American antitrust law case at the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally monopolizing the web browser market for Windows, primarily through the legal and technical restrictions it put on the abilities of PC manufacturers (OEMs) and users to uninstall Internet Explorer and use other programs such as Netscape and Java.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Google</span> Multinational American technology company

Google LLC is an American-based multinational corporation and technology company focusing on online advertising, search engine technology, cloud computing, computer software, quantum computing, e-commerce, consumer electronics, and artificial intelligence (AI). It has been referred to as "the most powerful company in the world" and is one of the world's most valuable brands due to its market dominance, data collection, and technological advantages in the field of AI. Google's parent company, Alphabet Inc., is one of the five Big Tech companies, alongside Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Microsoft.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hal Varian</span> American economist

Hal Ronald Varian is Chief Economist at Google and holds the title of emeritus professor at the University of California, Berkeley where he was founding dean of the School of Information. Varian is an economist specializing in microeconomics and information economics.

The multinational technology corporation Apple Inc. has been a participant in various legal proceedings and claims since it began operation and, like its competitors and peers, engages in litigation in its normal course of business for a variety of reasons. In particular, Apple is known for and promotes itself as actively and aggressively enforcing its intellectual property interests. From the 1980s to the present, Apple has been plaintiff or defendant in civil actions in the United States and other countries. Some of these actions have determined significant case law for the information technology industry and many have captured the attention of the public and media. Apple's litigation generally involves intellectual property disputes, but the company has also been a party in lawsuits that include antitrust claims, consumer actions, commercial unfair trade practice suits, defamation claims, and corporate espionage, among other matters.

Criticism of Google includes concern for tax avoidance, misuse and manipulation of search results, its use of others' intellectual property, concerns that its compilation of data may violate people's privacy and collaboration with the US military on Google Earth to spy on users, censorship of search results and content, its cooperation with the Israeli military on Project Nimbus targeting Palestinians and the energy consumption of its servers as well as concerns over traditional business issues such as monopoly, restraint of trade, antitrust, patent infringement, indexing and presenting false information and propaganda in search results, and being an "Ideological Echo Chamber".

Microsoft has been involved in numerous high-profile legal matters that involved litigation over the history of the company, including cases against the United States, the European Union, and competitors.

High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation is a 2010 United States Department of Justice (DOJ) antitrust action and a 2013 civil class action against several Silicon Valley companies for alleged "no cold call" agreements which restrained the recruitment of high-tech employees.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Amit Mehta</span> American judge (born 1971)

Amit Priyavadan Mehta is an American lawyer who has served as United States district judge of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia since 2014. In 2021, Mehta became a judge on the United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.

Google has been involved in multiple lawsuits over issues such as privacy, advertising, intellectual property and various Google services such as Google Books and YouTube. The company's legal department expanded from one to nearly 100 lawyers in the first five years of business, and by 2014 had grown to around 400 lawyers. Google's Chief Legal Officer is Senior Vice President of Corporate Development David Drummond.

Big Tech, also known as the Tech Giants or Tech Titans, is a grouping of the largest IT companies in the world. The concept of Big Tech is similar to the grouping of dominant companies in other sectors. It typically refers to the Big Five United States tech companies: Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, and Microsoft; or the Magnificent Seven, which includes Nvidia and Tesla. Big Tech can also include Chinese companies such as Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent, and Xiaomi (BATX).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kent Walker</span> American legal executive (1961-)

Kent Walker is an American legal executive who has served as President of Global Affairs and chief legal officer of Google & Alphabet since 2021.

Meta Platforms, Inc., has been involved in many lawsuits since its founding in 2004.

<i>Epic Games v. Apple</i> 2020 U.S. lawsuit

Epic Games, Inc. v. Apple Inc. was a lawsuit brought by Epic Games against Apple in August 2020 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, related to Apple's practices in the iOS App Store. Epic Games specifically had challenged Apple's restrictions on apps from having other in-app purchasing methods outside of the one offered by the App Store. Epic Games's founder Tim Sweeney had previously challenged the 30% revenue cut that Apple takes on each purchase made in the App Store, and with their game Fortnite, wanted to either bypass Apple or have Apple take less of a cut. Epic implemented changes in Fortnite intentionally on August 13, 2020, to bypass the App Store payment system, prompting Apple to block the game from the App Store and leading to Epic filing its lawsuit. Apple filed a countersuit, asserting Epic purposely breached its terms of contract with Apple to goad it into action, and defended itself from Epic's suit.

<i>Epic Games v. Google</i> Lawsuit by Epic Games against Google

Epic Games v. Google is a lawsuit brought by Epic Games against Google in August 2020 in the Northern District of California. Filed concurrently with Epic Games v. Apple, Epic had challenged Google's monopolistic practices on its Google Play Store on Android devices. A jury trial was held in November and December 2023, after which the jury found for Epic on all counts, ruling that Google violated anti-trust laws in maintaining the Play Store as the dominant storefront with Android, including making deals to ensure apps would be solely published through the Play Store and requiring the Play Store be installed on third-party devices. The court ordered Google to allow alternate app stores on the Android system and temporarily restricted them from engaging in monetary benefits to developers that released exclusively on Google's Play Store.

<i>Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms, Inc.</i> United States ongoing antitrust court case

Federal Trade Commission v. Meta Platforms, Inc. is an ongoing antitrust court case brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Facebook parent company Meta Platforms. The lawsuit alleges that Meta has accumulated monopoly power via anti-competitive mergers, with the suit centering on the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">New Brandeis movement</span> American academic and political movement

The New Brandeis or neo-Brandeis movement is an antitrust academic and political movement in the United States which argues that excessively centralized private power is dangerous for economical, political and social reasons. Initially called hipster antitrust by its detractors, also referred to as the "Columbia school" or "Neo-Progressive antitrust," the movement advocates that United States antitrust law return to a broader concern with private power and its negative effects on market competition, income inequality, consumer rights, unemployment, and wage growth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jonathan Kanter</span> American lawyer (born 1973)

Jonathan Seth Kanter is an American antitrust attorney who has served as assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division since November 16, 2021. Prior to this, Kanter worked as an antitrust attorney at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and in private practice.

<i>United States v. Google LLC</i> (2023) Antitrust case alleging Google illegally dominates digital advertising

United States v. Google LLC is an ongoing federal antitrust case brought by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) against Google LLC on January 24, 2023. The suit accuses Google of illegally monopolizing the advertising technology (adtech) market in violation of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890. The suit is separate from the first antitrust case launched in 2020 that accuses Google of an illegal monopoly in the search engine market.

<i>United States v. Apple</i> (2024) 2024 American court case

United States, et al. v. Apple Inc. is a lawsuit brought against multinational technology corporation Apple Inc. in 2024. The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges that Apple violated antitrust statutes. The lawsuit contrasts the practices of Apple with those of Microsoft in United States v. Microsoft Corp., and alleges that Apple is engaging in similar tactics and committing even more egregious violations. This lawsuit comes in the wake of Epic Games v. Apple and the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act in the European Union.

<i>United States v. Live Nation Entertainment</i> Ongoing American antitrust lawsuit

United States, et al. v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. and Ticketmaster Entertainment, LLC is an antitrust lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and twenty-nine states and Washington, D.C., against entertainment company Live Nation Entertainment and its subsidiary Ticketmaster, following the Taylor Swift–Ticketmaster controversy in 2022.

References

  1. 1 2 Kang, Cecilia; McCabe, David; Wakabayashi, Daisuke (October 20, 2020). "U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on October 20, 2020. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  2. 1 2 "Justice Department Sues Monopolist Google For Violating Antitrust Laws". Department of Justice. October 20, 2020. Archived from the original on January 20, 2021. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  3. 1 2 "Google's search engine dominance is at the center of the biggest US antitrust trial in decades". AP News. September 11, 2023. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  4. ↑ Barakat, Matthew; Liedtke, Michale (August 5, 2024). "Google illegally maintains monopoly over internet search, judge rules". Associated Press. Archived from the original on August 5, 2024. Retrieved August 6, 2024.
  5. ↑ Feiner, Lauren (August 5, 2024). "Judge rules that Google 'is a monopolist' in US antitrust case". The Verge . Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved August 5, 2024.
  6. ↑ Scarcella, Mike (September 11, 2023). "Explainer: Why is the US suing Google for antitrust violations?". Reuters. Archived from the original on October 31, 2023. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  7. 1 2 3 Feiner, Lauren (October 20, 2020). "Google sued by DOJ in antitrust case over search dominance". CNBC. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  8. 1 2 "What's next in Google's court battle with the US Justice Department?". Reuters. November 16, 2023. Archived from the original on December 4, 2023. Retrieved February 19, 2024.
  9. 1 2 Kerr, Dana (May 2, 2024). "U.S. v. Google: As landmark 'monopoly power' trial closes, here's what to look for". NPR. Archived from the original on August 6, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024. The U.S. has also sued Amazon, Apple and Facebook parent Meta over business practices it says hurts both rivals and consumers. How the judge rules in this case could have far-reaching effects on how people use and interact with the internet.
  10. 1 2 Weiss, Geoff (May 2, 2024). "The future of Google — and Big Tech — hangs in the balance at trial". Business Insider. Archived from the original on August 5, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  11. ↑ McCabe, David (May 2, 2024). "Strongest U.S. Challenge to Big Tech's Power Nears Climax in Google Trial". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024. American regulators have also sued Apple, Amazon and Meta in recent years for monopolistic behavior, and Google's case is likely to set a legal precedent for the group.
  12. ↑ Feiner, Lauren (January 24, 2023). "DOJ files second antitrust suit against Google, seeks to break up its ad business". CNBC. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
  13. ↑ Swartz, Jon (December 27, 2021). "Big Tech heads for 'a year of thousands of tiny tech papercuts,' but what antitrust efforts could make them bleed?". MarketWatch. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  14. ↑ Feiner, Lauren (October 6, 2020). "House Democrats say Facebook, Amazon, Alphabet, Apple enjoy 'monopoly power' and recommend big changes". CNBC. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  15. ↑ "#08-981: Yahoo! Inc. and Google Inc. Abandon Their Advertising Agreement (2008-11-05)". United States Department of Justice . November 5, 2008. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  16. ↑ Nylen, Leah (March 16, 2021). "How Washington fumbled the future". Politico. Archived from the original on May 31, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  17. ↑ Feiner, Lauren (December 18, 2020). "Google's antitrust mess: Here are all the major cases it's facing in the U.S. and Europe". CNBC. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  18. ↑ Bergqvist, Christian (November 12, 2020). "What the Department of Justice Can Learn from the European Union's Antitrust Investigations Into Google". ProMarket. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  19. ↑ Rund, Jacob; Holland, Jake; Beyoud, Lydia (October 21, 2020). "DOJ Trots Out Corporate, Tech Veterans in Google Antitrust Probe". Bloomberg Law. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  20. ↑ Bokat-Lindell, Spencer (October 22, 2020). "Opinion | The Case Against Google". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  21. ↑ Kendall, Brent (October 21, 2020). "U.S. v. Google: A Guide to the Government's Lawsuit". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  22. ↑ "Top Apple executives likely to be deposed in U.S. fight with Google". Reuters. February 11, 2022. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  23. ↑ Bartz, Diane (December 13, 2022). "Google asks court to toss out federal antitrust lawsuit". Reuters. Archived from the original on December 14, 2022. Retrieved December 14, 2022.
  24. ↑ Perlman, Matthew (April 27, 2023). "Google Search Judge Needs More Info On Chat Sanctions Bid". Law360. Archived from the original on June 6, 2023. Retrieved June 6, 2023. Google is represented by John E. Schmidtlein, Benjamin M. Greenblum and Colette T. Connor of Williams & Connolly LLP, Wendy Huang Waszmer, Susan A. Creighton and Franklin M. Rubinstein of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC and Mark S. Popofsky and Matthew McGinnis of Ropes & Gray LLP.
  25. ↑ Fung, Brian (August 4, 2023). "Judge narrows Trump-era Google antitrust case brought by states and the Justice Department. CNN Business". CNN. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved August 5, 2023.
  26. ↑ Michaels, Dave (February 23, 2023). "Justice Department Says Google Destroyed Evidence Related to Antitrust Lawsuit". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
  27. ↑ Fung, Brian (February 23, 2023). "DOJ seeks court sanctions against Google over 'intentional destruction' of chat logs | CNN Business". CNN. Archived from the original on May 3, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  28. ↑ Papscun, Dan (September 11, 2024). "Google Risks Attack Over Deleted Chats in Search Monopoly Trial". Bloomberg Law. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  29. ↑ Perez, Sarah (February 27, 2023). "DoJ accuses Google of deleting chats in its antitrust investigation, similar to Fortnite's case". TechCrunch. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  30. ↑ "Google, Backed by Hogan Lovells, Asks DOJ to Investigate Kanter Recusal". National Law Journal. Archived from the original on May 21, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  31. ↑ Tribe, Laurence (February 1, 2022). "Google's Calls for Jonathan Kanter's Recusal Are Baseless". ProMarket. Archived from the original on June 22, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  32. ↑ Nylen, Leah (May 10, 2022). "Antitrust Chief Barred From Google Cases Amid Recusal Push". Bloomberg.com. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  33. ↑ Brody, Ben (January 5, 2022). "Elizabeth Warren wants Jonathan Canter on the Google lawsuit - Protocol". Protocol. Archived from the original on October 31, 2023. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  34. ↑ Sisco, Josh (January 13, 2023). "DOJ antitrust chief cleared to oversee Google probes". POLITICO. Archived from the original on March 20, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
  35. ↑ Sisco, Josh; Bordelon, Brendan (September 12, 2023). "Google's antitrust trial for the 'future of the internet' starts up". Archived from the original on October 7, 2023. Retrieved October 7, 2023.
  36. ↑ Choi, Inyoung (September 15, 2023). "DOJ v. Google: Landmark antitrust case wraps up first week". NBC News. Archived from the original on February 25, 2024. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  37. ↑ Bartz, Diane (October 18, 2023). "Google executive defends search quality in US antitrust trial". Reuters. Archived from the original on October 31, 2023. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  38. ↑ Patel, Nilay (October 16, 2023). "The Google antitrust trial has been frustratingly locked down — the NYT just filed a motion to open it up". The Verge. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  39. ↑ Nover, Scott (October 25, 2023). "Google's on Trial. No Looking". Slate. ISSN   1091-2339. Archived from the original on August 6, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  40. ↑ Papscun, Dan (August 18, 2023). "Judge Deciding Google Antitrust Fate Criticized for Closed Court". Bloomberg Law. Archived from the original on May 3, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024. Mehta has been criticized for how often he's closed his courtroom for certain testimony, and delaying a ruling on when trial exhibits could be made public. That's a departure from much of his prior practice. For example, in prosecutions of people involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol, he regularly left the courtroom open.
  41. ↑ Robertson, Adi (September 27, 2023). "The Google antitrust trial is opening back up... a little". The Verge. Archived from the original on August 6, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  42. ↑ Kruppa, Miles (September 26, 2023). "Google Trial Spills Details on Search Engine's Deals With Apple, Samsung". WSJ. Archived from the original on March 24, 2024. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  43. ↑ Pierce, David (October 11, 2023). "The Google trial shows that Apple's search deal is the most important contract in tech". The Verge. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  44. ↑ Bartz, Diane (October 12, 2023). "Five things to know about the Google antitrust trial as it hits halfway mark". Reuters. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  45. ↑ Nylen, Leah (October 19, 2023). "DOJ Google Antitrust Case Wraps With Apple Deal on Center Stage". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on October 19, 2023. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  46. ↑ "US wraps up antitrust case against Google in historic trial". Reuters. November 16, 2023. Retrieved February 19, 2024.
  47. ↑ Michaels, Dave; Wolfe, Jan; Kruppa, Miles (November 16, 2023). "Google Antitrust Judge Says He Has 'No Idea' How He Will Rule". WSJ. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved February 20, 2024.
  48. ↑ McCabe, David (May 2, 2024). "Strongest U.S. Challenge to Big Tech's Power Nears Climax in Google Trial". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
  49. ↑ McCabe, David (August 5, 2024). "Google Violated Antitrust Laws in Online Search, Judge Rules". The New York Times . Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved August 5, 2024.
  50. ↑ Fung, Brian (August 5, 2024). "Google loses massive antitrust lawsuit over its search dominance". CNN . Archived from the original on August 5, 2024. Retrieved August 5, 2024.
  51. ↑ Liedtke, Michael (September 6, 2024). "Judge gives US regulators until December to propose penalties for Google's illegal search monopoly". The Associated Press . Retrieved September 9, 2024.
  52. ↑ McCabe, David (November 20, 2024). "U.S. Proposes Breakup of Google to Fix Search Monopoly". The New York Times . Retrieved November 27, 2024.
  53. ↑ Gregg, Aaron; de Vynck, Gerrit (November 21, 2024). "What the DOJ's breakup of Google, sale of Chrome means for the Internet". The Washington Post . Retrieved November 27, 2024.
  54. 1 2 Feiner, Lauren (November 21, 2024). "DOJ says Google must sell Chrome to crack open its search monopoly". The Verge . Retrieved November 27, 2024.
  55. ↑ Michaels, Dave; Kruppa, Miles (November 21, 2024). "Google Should Be Forced to Sell Chrome Browser, Justice Department Says" . The Wall Street Journal . Retrieved November 27, 2024.
  56. ↑ Bordelon, Brendan (November 20, 2024). "DOJ asks judge to break up Google". Politico . Retrieved November 27, 2024.
  57. ↑ Rosoff, Matt (October 20, 2020). "DOJ case against Google has strong echoes of Microsoft antitrust case". CNBC. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  58. ↑ Carreras, Daniela (October 21, 2020). "United States v. Google LLC: Cracking Down on Big Tech". University of Miami Law Review. Archived from the original on August 12, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  59. ↑ Kang, Cecilia; Isaac, Mike (December 9, 2020). "U.S. and States Say Facebook Illegally Crushed Competition". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022. The investigations already led to a lawsuit against Google, brought by the Justice Department two months ago, that accuses the search giant of illegally protecting a monopoly.
  60. ↑ Gold, Ashley (October 28, 2020). "Exclusive: Poll shows bipartisan support for tech antitrust action". Axios. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  61. ↑ Levitsky, Allison (October 21, 2020). "Lots of tech employees say Google anti-trust action has merit. Google workers say otherwise". Silicon Valley Business Journal. Archived from the original on December 5, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  62. ↑ Harshawn Ratanpal (October 5, 2023). "Google ramped up federal lobbying ahead of DOJ antitrust showdown". Open Secrets. Archived from the original on October 6, 2023. Retrieved October 7, 2023.
  63. 1 2 3 Lima, Cristiano (October 20, 2020). "DOJ's Google suit meets bipartisan praise, but questions arise on its motives". POLITICO. Archived from the original on June 1, 2023. Retrieved June 1, 2023.
  64. ↑ Kafka, Peter (October 20, 2020). "Bill Barr and Elizabeth Warren find a common enemy: Google". Vox. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  65. ↑ Sozzi, Brian (October 21, 2020). "Senator Ted Cruz: Big tech companies like Google are 'drunk on power'". Yahoo! Finance. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  66. ↑ Copeland, Rob (October 21, 2020). "Former Google CEO Fires Back at Justice Department's Antitrust Suit". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on May 30, 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022.
  67. ↑ "Justice Dept. files landmark antitrust case against Google". Associated Press. April 20, 2021. Archived from the original on June 1, 2023. Retrieved June 1, 2023.
  68. ↑ Perlman, Matthew (December 17, 2020). "Google Hit With 3rd Monopolization Suit". Law360. Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. Retrieved May 29, 2022. The case is State of Colorado et al. v. Google LLC, case number 1:20-cv-03715, in the U.S. District Court for District of Columbia.
  69. ↑ Feiner, Lauren (December 17, 2020). "Google hit with its third antitrust lawsuit since October, this time by a bipartisan coalition of states". CNBC. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  70. ↑ Feiner, Lauren (July 7, 2021). "States bring a new antitrust suit against Google over its mobile app store". CNBC. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  71. ↑ "Google reaches tentative settlement with all 50 states over alleged app store monopoly". AP News. September 6, 2023. Archived from the original on February 4, 2024. Retrieved October 19, 2023.
  72. ↑ Feiner, Lauren (January 24, 2023). "DOJ files second antitrust lawsuit against Google". CNBC. Archived from the original on January 24, 2023. Retrieved January 24, 2023.
  73. ↑ Kruppa, Miles; Schechner, Sam; Michaels, Dave (January 24, 2023). "DOJ Sues Google, Seeking to Break Up Online Advertising Business". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
  74. ↑ Bartz, Diane; Dave, Paresh (March 30, 2022). "Exclusive: U.S. probe of Google Maps picks up speed". Reuters. Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. Retrieved May 29, 2022.
  75. ↑ Sisco, Josh (February 22, 2023). "DOJ pushes ahead with Google Maps antitrust probe". POLITICO. Archived from the original on April 2, 2023. Retrieved April 2, 2023.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.