The impact of the massive trial against Google in the US shook the tech world. Allegations of violating antitrust laws and illegally dominating the online search industry have left everyone speechless.
Recently, a relative of mine had an unpleasant experience while doing a quick Google search for a visa to New Zealand. After opening the first link, a few steps later, they ended up on a website that charged $118 for the required documents. They later realized they had paid an “Internet-based travel technology company” and not a government agency. They were cheated and paid twice more than required.
Fortunately, they were able to get a refund. However, this error highlights one of the most frustrating things about Google. Many times, the ads appearing in the search results, like the link they clicked on, confuse the users.
Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser said Google allowed false ads to appear on its search engine because there was no real competition. Weiser and other lawyers allege that Google illegally obtained 90% of online searches, leaving consumers worse off than if there was real competition.
Google CEO Sundar Pichai is expected to testify along with executives from competing companies and antitrust legal experts. The verdict will be announced in several months and appeals will surely continue for years.
The lawsuit against Google is one of several antitrust lawsuits brought by the US government against major tech companies. Weiser notes that this is one of the most expensive cases ever seen.
In the coming week, Colorado, Tennessee and the U.S. The Department of Justice and every other state in the country will be the lead plaintiffs. If Judge Amit Mehta rules in favor of the plaintiffs, there will be a second round of hearings to determine the sanctions against Google.
The lawsuit against Google is based on two allegations of antitrust violations of the Sherman Act. Google has been accused of illegally excluding its rivals by sharing advertising revenue with smartphone manufacturers and browser developers in exchange for having the search engine default on its computers.
The US government argues that it is not important that consumers choose Google over alternatives such as Bing or DuckDuckGo. They argue that fees to make Google the default search engine cost competitors growth and development. On the other hand, Google insists that it invests significantly in improving the user experience.
A coalition of states led by Colorado and Tennessee will bring a second lawsuit, arguing that Google unfairly delayed support for competing search engines.
During the trial, Google will be closed to the public and media for several days to protect the confidentiality of the data. Google’s payment to its partners will be one of the points that will be discussed exclusively before Justice Mehta.
The experiment is an opportunity to question the power and influence of big tech companies, and seek more competition and transparency in the online search space. The outcome of this case could set an important precedent for the future of the technology and its regulation.
“Typical beer advocate. Future teen idol. Unapologetic tv practitioner. Music trailblazer.”