In courtroom number 10 at the Federal Courthouse in Washington there is an eerie wall clock with no hands. In this room full of lawyers, the prosecutor who accuses Google of abusing its monopoly position as a search engine suggested time travel. In his opening statement, he said that “the future of the Internet” was at stake in the trial that began this Tuesday. And to lay the foundation for that future and determine whether Google’s search engine will ever face serious competition, he added, we must look to the past and see how “it has illegally maintained a monopoly for more than a decade.”
Without reaching the end of the day, when charges were brought against Donald Trump in the same complex for attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election, there was an atmosphere of great events in the courts. Photographers and television cameras were stationed at the entrances, and there were long lines at the entrance. The courts have set up two rooms to accommodate the large number of journalists attending the most important illegal monopoly trial in two decades since the Microsoft case. In the courtroom to which EL PAÍS had access, about half of the hundred or so people present were lawyers from both parties. Judge Amit P. Mehta entered the courtroom promptly at 9:30 a.m. local time and joked about it. “Even in Washington, I think we have a higher concentration of blue suits today than anywhere else here.”
Justice Department prosecutor Kenneth Dintzer, 59, opened opening statements. This was supported by slides, some of which were quite simple, which could be seen on two large screens on the sides of the room and on the numerous monitors of judges, public prosecutors and lawyers. In one of the first, he introduced the vicious or virtuous circle that Google has used to establish its dominance in search queries. This wheel of search, scale, revenue and exclusive deals has been turning for more than a decade, he said, “and always in Google’s favor.”
Dintzer, who stuttered at times, especially when the judge interrupted him with his questions, did not give a date as to when Google achieved its dominant position, but assured that the company had maintained it through illegal practices since 2010. Having a monopoly is legal, but abusing it is against the law. The accusation focuses primarily on the agreements with mobile and browser manufacturers such as Apple, Samsung and Mozilla, through which Google became the default search engine, which Google used as a “weapon”.
“Google pays more than $10 billion a year for these privileged positions,” Dintzer said. “Google’s contracts ensure that competitors cannot match the search quality of ad monetization, especially on mobile.” In addition, internal Google messages appeared on the screen that showed how the company was putting pressure on these agreements, such as with this Apple didn’t redirect searches to Siri or Samsung to make their own suggestions. “Your Honor, this is a monopoly in action.”
The prosecutor also accuses the company of concealing and deleting internal documents and messages that could serve as evidence against the company. Has anyone taught along these lines? “They eliminated history, your honor, so they could rewrite it here in court,” Dintzer said.
The answer came from John Schmidtlein, a 57-year-old partner at the law firm Williams & Connolly who is defending Google. The lawyer asserted that users now have more search options and more ways to access information on the Internet than ever before. According to the Department of Justice, their share of general searches in the United States is 89%.
The company, now integrated into Alphabet, believes that the market to be considered should be broader and, in addition to artificial intelligence, should also include product searches on Amazon or on social networks such as Instagram or TikTok. Travel companies (TripAdvisor, Expedia, Booking.com or Hotels.com) and food delivery companies (such as Doordash, UberEats and Yelp) are also competitors, their defense says.
Schmidtein has insisted that the other competitors have prevailed not because Google has abused its position, but because its search engine is better. He also emphasized that it is easy to change the default search engine of browsers, although the prosecutor previously pointed out that users usually do not do this. The judge asked the lawyer how many people do it and he apologized, saying no data was available. To demonstrate his lack of malice, he pointed out that there are tutorials on YouTube (owned by Google) showing how to switch to another search engine.
“Plaintiffs’ claims seek to distort competition in search by hindering Google and its ability to compete, in the hope that forcing people to use inferior products in the short term is somehow good for competition in the long run.” , he concluded argument.
After these initial presentations, a witness parade lasting approximately ten weeks begins. Expected to be among them are Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai and Apple executives.
If Judge Amit P. Mehta, appointed by Barack Obama in 2014, concludes that Google’s position is monopolistic, that the company has abused it and that this has directly or indirectly harmed consumers, he will have ample leeway to make mitigating decisions . The Justice Department referred to them very broadly in its lawsuit. The ruling can be appealed to an appeals court and possibly the Supreme Court.
Attorney General Merrick Garland announced another lawsuit against Google last January, in this case alleging abuse of a dominant position in the digital advertising market. This case is not expected to be heard until next year. In that lawsuit, the government specifically requested that it split its business in this area through divestitures to promote competition.
The European Union is at the forefront of the offensive against Google’s monopolistic practices. While the trial of the first of the two pending cases is now beginning in the USA (there is a third, concerning the application store, in which the company has reached an out-of-court settlement in principle), the European Commission has given in to Google and imposed the three largest fines his story. A year ago, judges backed a record $4.125 million fine for the company for anti-competitive practices in search services (a case similar to the one now being heard in Washington, but focused on the Android operating system). In addition, in November 2021 they ratified an additional amount of 2.4 billion for the privilege of their products during searches (this part was not taken into account in the current litigation). In addition, in March 2019, the Commission imposed a further fine of almost 1.5 billion euros for its abuses in the digital advertising market. A total of more than 8,000 million.
Follow all information Business And Business on Facebook and Twitteror in our weekly newsletter
The five-day agenda
The top business quotes of the day, with the keys and context to understand their implications.
RECEIVE IT IN THE MAIL
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits