Google, US Justice Department face off in climactic showdown in search monopoly case
Google will return to federal court on May 30 to fend off the US Justice Department's attempt to topple its internet empire at the same time it's navigating a pivotal shift to artificial intelligence that could undercut its power.
The legal and technological threats facing Google are among the key issues that will be dissected during the closing arguments of a legal proceeding that will determine the changes imposed upon the company in the wake of its dominant search engine being declared as an illegal monopoly by US District Judge Amit Mehta last year.
Brandishing evidence presented during a recent three-week stretch of hearings, Justice Department lawyers will attempt to persuade Mehta to order a radical shake-up that includes a ban on Google paying to lock its search engine in as the default on smart devices and an order requiring the company to sell its Chrome browser.
Google lawyers are expected to assert only minor concessions are needed, especially as the upheaval triggered by advances in artificial intelligence already are reshaping the search landscape, as alternative, conversational search options are rolling out from AI startups that are hoping to use the Department of Justice's four-and-half-year-old case to gain the upper hand in the next technological frontier.
"Over weeks of testimony, we heard from a series of well-funded companies eager to gain access to Google's technology so they don't have to innovate themselves,' Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, wrote in a blog post earlier this month. "What we didn't hear was how DOJ's extreme proposals would benefit consumers.'
After the day-long closing arguments, Mehta will spend much of the summer mulling a decision that he plans to issue before Labor Day. Google has already vowed to appeal the ruling that branded its search engine as a monopoly, a step it can't take until the judge orders a remedy.
While both sides of this showdown agree that AI is an inflection point for the industry's future, they have disparate views on how the shift will affect Google.
The Justice Department contends that AI technology by itself won't rein in Google's power, arguing additional legal restraints must be slapped on a search engine that's the main reason its parent company, Alphabet Inc, is valued at US$2 trillion (RM8.49 trillion).
Google has already been deploying AI to transform its search engine into an answer engine, an effort that has so far helped maintain its perch as the internet's main gateway despite inroads being made by alternatives from the likes of OpenAI and Perplexity.
The Justice Department contends a divestiture of the Chrome browser that Google CEO Sundar Pichai helped build nearly 20 years ago would be among the most effective countermeasures against Google continuing to amass massive volumes of browser traffic and personal data that could be leveraged to retain its dominance in the AI era. Executives from both OpenAi and Perplexity testified last month that they would be eager bidders for the Chrome browser if Mehta orders its sale.
The debate over Google's fate also has pulled in opinions from Apple, mobile app developers, legal scholars and startups.
Apple, which collects more than US$20bil (RM84.88bil) annually to make Google the default search engine on the iPhone and its other devices, filed briefs arguing against the Justice Department's proposed 10-year ban on such lucrative lock-in agreements. Apple told the judge that prohibiting the contracts would deprive the company of money that it funnels into its own research, and that the ban might even make Google even more powerful because the company would be able to hold onto its money while consumers would end up choosing its search engine anyway. The Cupertino, California, company also told the judge a ban wouldn't compel it to build its own search engine to compete against Google.
In other filings, a group of legal scholars said the Justice Department's proposed divestiture of Chrome would be an improper penalty that would inject unwarranted government interference in a company's business. Meanwhile, former Federal Trade Commission officials James Cooper and Andrew Stivers warned that another proposal that would require Google to share its data with rival search engines "does not account for the expectations users have developed over time regarding the privacy, security, and stewardship' of their personal information.
The App Association, a group that represents mostly small software developers, also advised Mehta not to adopt the Justice Department's proposed changes because of the ripple effects they would have across the tech industry.
Hobbling Google in the way the Justice Department envisions would make it more difficult for startups to realise their goal of being acquired, the App Association wrote. "Developers will be overcome by uncertainty' if Google is torn apart, the group argues.
Buy Y Combinator, an incubator that has helped create hundreds of startups collectively worth about US$800bil (RM 3.39 trillion) filed documents pushing for the dramatic overhaul of Google, whose immense power has discouraged venture capitalists from investing in areas that are considered to be part of the company's "kill zone'.
Startups "also need to be able to get their products into the hands of users, free from restrictive dealing and self-preferencing that locks up important distribution channels. As things stand, Google has locked up the most critical distribution channels, freezing the general search and search text advertising markets into static competition for more than a decade,' Y Combinator told Mehta. – AP
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malay Mail
11 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Control in the name of distraction — Aisha Fahmy Mohd Zulhery Fahmy
JUNE 22 — People call them big companies or even giants: Google, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Meta, Netflix. These names dominate our digital world. They've become so woven into our daily lives that we often forget just how much we rely on them. At the touch of our fingertips, we send messages, stream videos, search for answers, shop, and socialise. The line 'there's an app for that' came from their inventions. In many ways, these companies built the modern digital landscape. Thanks to them, we're more connected than ever before. We can communicate across borders, access information instantly, and enjoy the kind of convenience our ancestors couldn't have imagined. But with great innovation comes great responsibility and even greater power. The question is: Where do we draw the line? Yes, we should be thankful for the tools they've created. But we should also be cautious. There's a saying: 'Don't bite the hand that feeds you,' but perhaps in this case, the real warning should be: 'Don't keep eating if the hand starts feeding you poison.' These platforms don't just connect us — they also control the flow of information we see. The news we read, the videos we watch, the ads we encounter, even the people we interact with — much of it is determined by algorithms designed by a few powerful corporations. This control over information isn't just a matter of business. It affects public opinion, political debates, and even personal beliefs. When a handful of companies can amplify some voices while silencing others, promote certain narratives while burying others, it becomes clear that they don't just participate in the media industry — they dominate it. And the content never stops. We scroll endlessly through social media, binge-watch entire series in a weekend, and click through a dozen tabs without finishing a single one. At some point, this starts to feel less like freedom and more like hypnosis. We're feeding on content voluntarily but without limits. We're consuming and consuming, but what are we really getting in return? Control of information affects public opinion, political debates, and even personal beliefs. — Picture from Unsplash/Maxim Ilyahov I believe this endless stream of media has become a distraction — a way to pull us away from the real world, from reality itself. Instead of looking out at the world and engaging with people face to face, we're staring into screens, losing ourselves in curated images and carefully calculated feeds. And while it feels like we're in control, choosing what to watch or who to follow, the truth is, much of our experience is shaped by behind-the-scenes algorithms we don't fully understand. Of course, not everything is harmful. There are many benefits to the digital world: education, community-building, activism, entertainment, even healing. But we can't ignore the other sides too. The addictive design of social media, the spread of misinformation, the invasion of privacy, the mental health challenges — it's all part of the same package. So yes, the tech giants are part of the media industry — but they're more than that. They are the media industry now. They've become the new gatekeepers of information. And while they promise freedom, access, and innovation, they also hold immense power over what we see, what we know, and how we feel. The real challenge isn't just recognising this power — it's deciding what to do with it. Should we regulate them? Should we limit our use? Should we demand more transparency? These are the questions we need to start asking, not just as consumers, but as citizens of a digital world. * Aisha Fahmy Mohd Zulhery Fahmy is an undergraduate student of Universiti Malaya, taking an elective university course entitled 'Introduction to Journalism and Storytelling in Digital Age'. ** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
Malay Mail
16 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Tengku Zafrul: Google's Malaysia investment to boost AI growth, create jobs
KUALA LUMPUR, June 22 — Tech giant Google's investment in Malaysia is expected to continue driving Malaysia's artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud computing economy. Investment, Trade and Industry Minister Tengku Datuk Seri Zafrul Abdul Aziz, who is currently on a working visit to Washington, United States, met with Google representatives to discuss how the company can continue to drive AI development in Malaysia, strengthen cybersecurity and invest in digital skills. 'The government is committed to providing full support and ensuring a conducive investment climate for high-quality investments,' he said in a Facebook post. He added that Google's strategic investment of RM9.4 billion to set up its first data centre and Google Cloud region in Malaysia is expected to generate RM15.04 billion in long-term economic impact and create 26,500 jobs by 2030. 'Thank you, Google, for your continued confidence in Malaysia. Together, we are building a brighter digital future,' he said. — Bernama
The Star
17 hours ago
- The Star
Phone users being bombarded by scamming 'onslaught,' survey finds
More than half of people say they're being hit with attempted scams every day in a dispiriting "onslaught" that is making it tougher to tell fake messages from genuine, research shows. — Photo: Bernd Diekjobst/dpa LOS ANGELES: Owning a mobile phone is increasingly troublesome and irritating as dangerous scams and spam become ever more prevalent, according to new survey results from Malwarebytes. The internet security company found more than half the people asked complain they are hit with attempted scams every day in a dispiriting "onslaught" that is making it tougher to tell fake messages from genuine and to which one in four phone users appear to have surrendered. "Phishing texts arrive from endless new phone numbers, deepfake extortion threats upend lives, and scams everywhere now mimic routine interactions – hiding behind QR codes, imposter websites, and even high-ranking Google ads," Malwarebytes warned, publishing findings that will likely resonate with many smartphone users. The survey, which was carried out in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, the UK and the US, indicated that users' "everyday habits" leave them more vulnerable to attack as almost all "trade data for deals" and for what looks at first glance to be convenience, handing over personal data to applications and granting permissions for deep-reaching access to devices. And while almost eight out of ten people asked said they worry about such risks, around 25% of say they no longer care, seeing scams as "an inevitable cost of being online." Financial loss, fraud, account and device lockout, identity theft and privacy leaks were among the risks people said they worried about while using their devices - threats that are likely to get worse as artificial intelligence becomes more widely used. "Malicious texts pose as package delivery notifications, phishing emails impersonate trusted brands and unknown calls hide extortion attempts, virtual kidnapping schemes," Malwarebytes said. The survey authors warned that "routine phone habits" such as clicking tracking links and comparing prices "open the door to fraud," with younger phone-addicted age groups such as Generation Z and millennials more likely to click though on phones than others or those who use computers regularly. – dpa
