Republicans’ antitrust lawsuit misses the real problems with Google’s power

Google responds to recent anticompetition lawsuit

The Justice Department might fire back that Google is always going to be better as long as it has more people using its service: More people means more data, which in turn means better results, which in turn means more people - and more people is precisely what these contracts are created to guarantee. Google is a leviathan; critics have long complained of a litany of potentially problematic practices for authorities to scrutinize.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who was nominated to the court by President Barack Obama, has been selected to hear the U.S. Justice Department's case against Alphabet's Google GOOGL.O , according to a court filing on Wednesday. The department has filed an antitrust lawsuit against the company and it's largely based on the deals Google has signed with other tech companies to be the default Search engine and browser on devices.

"If I were betting on this, I would say that it's better for the government than for Google", said Weinstein, who added: "In any individual case, it's hard to pin too much on the judge".

In one of the posts, Ken Walker, Senior Vice President of Global Affairs, Google described the issue as deeply flawed, and wrote in the blog post: "People use Google because they choose to, not because they are forced to, or because they can not find alternatives", Walker admitted.

Google's Mr. Walker said the federal lawsuit's consequences would be bad for consumers. "People use Google because they choose to, not because they're forced to, or because they can't find alternatives", he wrote in the blog post.


Walker goes on to provide an overview of some of Google's agreements with technology companies like Apple, LG and Samsung, and he likens Google's contracts to buying eye level shelf space at a grocery store. The DOJ has alleged that Apple and Google work work on this agreement as "one company". For smaller companies that compete with Google.

Google has used monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for its search engine on devices, browsers and other search access points, continuing the monopoly.

We understand that with our success comes scrutiny, but we stand by our position. We're confident that a court will conclude that this suit doesn't square with either the facts or the law.

If the states decide to move forward, a possible lawsuit would likely address more issues than the Justice Department case, according to people familiar with the matter.

Related:

Comments

Latest news

The Union says Australia Post issues extend past luxury watches
Ms Holgate, 59, first raised eyebrows past year with her new wheels - an electric blue Range Rover with personalised "POSTY1" number plates.

CSU Health Network encourages flu shots, debunks myths
Those schedules were set before COVID-19 was declared a pandemic. "I encourage all residents to get their flu shot this year". Foster added there are more people that have gotten the flu vaccine this year in comparison to this same time last year.

Apex Legends Halloween event returns with Shadow Royale mode
For a full list of the available cosmetics, you can check the EA website here! That's everything for this year. With freakish speed, deadly claws, and the ability to revive your teammates, you won't miss a step.

Californian appeals court rules Uber, Lyft must reclassify drivers as employees
The appeals court judges ruled Ubers and Lyfts misclassification irreparably harmed drivers, because they missed out on Employee Benefits as independent contractors.

Sacha Baron Cohen Defends Borat Against Rudy Giuliani
Thursday's Twitter post was one of several brilliant promotions that Baron Cohen and Amazon staged on Thursday. "If Sacha Baron Cohen implies otherwise he is a stone-cold liar".

Other news