Google Search dominance faces grave threat after monopoly ruling

A US court has ruled Google Search represents an anti-competitive “monopolgy” in a stunning anti-trust ruling that could result in a vast reshaping of how web users find information online.

In verdict delivered on Monday and favouring a US goverment case, US District Judge Amit Mehta called Google a “monopolist” who had acted in a manner that would protect that monopoly.

The judge wrote: “After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly. It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act.”

In a verdict that Google is almost certain to appeal, the judge cited exclusive deals Google has signed with the likes of Apple to be the default search provider, which have been worth billions to Apple and ensured Google Search is the first port of call for users unless they delve into the settings.

The trial revealed Google paid Apple a whopping $20 billion in 2022 alone. It’s possible that deal (and others with the likes of Samsung and Mozilla) will now be prohibited moving forward, should the ruling be upheld. The judge had questioned how a competitor could possible challenge Google in the current environment.

In the written opinion, judge Mehta added: “Specifically, the court holds that (1) there are relevant product markets for general search services and general search text ads; (2) Google has monopoly power in those markets; (3)Google’s distribution agreements are exclusive and have anticompetitive effects; and (4) Google has not offered valid procompetitive justifications for those agreements. Importantly, the court also finds that Google has exercised its monopoly power by charging supracompetitive prices for general search text ads. That conduct has allowed Google to earn monopoly profits.”

In the antitrust trial that has lasted more than ten weeks, the US goverment’s Department of Justice had claimed this tactic had prevented rivals from challenging Google search’s dominance. The judge also ruled Google had been able to charge higher prices for advertising, which is the entire point of it having a search engine in the first place.

Google had claimed throughout the trial that it’s edge had come through being the product customers prefer to use, rather than through practices that had stunted competition.

Google is yet to comment on the verdict, which you can read here (via The Verge). We will update this story when that statement becomes available. It’s possible any appeal could be heard by the United States Supreme Court.