Google’s longtime rivals like Yelp and DuckDuckGo scored a huge victory Monday when a federal judge ruled that Google had an illegal monopoly. But they showed restraint in their statements about the ruling. That’s because the work to restore competition has just begun, and the judge has yet to decide what that effort will include. With so many options out there, Google’s rivals are pushing for changes they think will help their businesses, but it might be harder than it sounds.
“While we are encouraged by this decision, strong remedies are critical,” Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman wrote in a blog post after the ruling. He mentioned a new phase of the trial that will begin in September.
“We’ve passed a critical milestone, but there’s still a lot of history to be written,” Kamyl Bazbaz, senior vice president of public affairs at DuckDuckGo, said in a statement. “Google will do whatever it takes to hinder progress, which is why we want to see “A robust remediation trial that really digs into all the details, comes up with a range of remedial measures that actually work, and puts in place an oversight body to govern them.”
The statements reflect an understanding that Judge Amit Mehta’s decision on how to restore competition will be as important, if not more important, than his ruling that Google violated antitrust laws. The recently concluded liability phase determined that Google violated the Sherman Act by entering into exclusive contracts with phone and browser manufacturers to maintain its default search engine status. During the remediation phase, Mehta will determine how to restore competition in general search services and search text ads. But weak remedies will only give Google a pass.
DuckDuckGo understands better than most the importance of effective remedies. A few years ago, Google was ruled a monopoly in the European Union, and the region implemented a choice screen in an attempt to create competition, requiring device users to choose their default search engine. But the approach doesn’t appear to have had as much of an impact as rivals once hoped — and Google remains overwhelmingly dominant.
“[W]We cannot emphasize this enough: implementation details matter,” said Bazbaz. In the EU, “there are some promising solutions, but Google has found it relatively easy to implement them.” DuckDuckGo called for the creation of a “truly independent” group of technical experts to oversee any remedies imposed by the court, “to ensure that Google does not Will find new ways to give themselves preferential treatment.”
“[W]We cannot stress this enough: implementation details matter”
DuckDuckGo says some solutions in Europe could be effective if implemented in a better way. For example, the selection screen could pop up “periodically” instead of just once during initial setup. Instead, the company wants to ban “dark mode” pop-ups that send people back to their default state, but the company says the EU is not enforcing this rule.
DuckDuckGo also recommended that the court prohibit Google from purchasing default states or pre-installations (which could undermine its multibillion-dollar deal with Apple) and providing access to its search and advertising APIs.
Yelp’s Stoppelman said Google should be required to “strip services that unfairly benefit from its search monopoly as a direct and enforceable remedy to prevent future anticompetitive conduct.” Stoppelman said the judge should also injunction Google uses exclusive default search deals and “self-preferences its own content in search results.”
Other enforcement advocates against Google, including groups representing publishers who advertise on the service or rely on search traffic, have also made recommendations. Digital Content Next CEO Jason Kint said in a phone interview with reporters from the American Economic Freedom Project that forcing Google to separate its Chrome and Android businesses could be a useful solution. That’s because data from browsers and mobile operating systems can be used to expand the size of search queries and make the product more powerful, Gent said. “The underlying data that ties all this together is a critical asset that needs to be constrained,” he said. AELP senior counsel Lee Hepner added that the business separation “will create competition for alternative search competitors on Chrome or Android.”
Whatever happens, the process is likely to be a long one. Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, confirmed the company planned to appeal the ruling, saying the decision “acknowledges that Google provides the best search engine, but concludes that we should not be allowed to provide it lightly.”
Meanwhile, the specter of artificial intelligence looms over the case, making any proposed solution meaningless if it doesn’t take into account how the entire search business model is likely to change in the coming years. Heppner said the court could consider solutions such as requiring Google to open access to its large language model (LLM).
Justice Department antitrust chief Jonathan Kanter did not comment specifically on what remedies the department would seek, noting only that they “need to be forward-looking” in addressing issues such as artificial intelligence. But he has previously said the department will “pursue structural remedies wherever possible in our conduct cases,” meaning breakups rather than mandating changes in certain behaviors. If the Justice Department proposes broad remedies, and Mehta rules in favor, the result could be an entirely new tech landscape.
“I believe Judge Mehta’s decision will be as important, if not more important, than the Microsoft antitrust case 23 years ago,” Stoppelman wrote. “This decision ushered in an unprecedented era of innovation, allowing promising new companies, including Google, to flourish. Just imagine the new developments we will see from this ruling over the next decade and beyond. Technology and innovation, it’s so exciting.
