US regulators want a federal judge to break up Google to prevent the company from continuing to squash competition through its dominant search engine after a court found it had maintained an abusive monopoly over the past decade.
The proposed breakup floated in a 23-page document filed by the US Justice Department calls for Google to sell its industry-leading Chrome web browser and impose restrictions designed to prevent its Android smartphone software from favouring its search engine.
The recommended penalties underscore how severely regulators operating under President Joe Biden believe Google should be punished following an August ruling by US District Judge Amit Mehta that branded Google as a monopolist.
The Justice Department decision-makers who will inherit the case after president-elect Donald Trump takes office next year might not be as strident.
The Washington, DC court hearings on Google’s punishment are scheduled to begin in April and Mr Mehta is aiming to issue his final decision before Labour Day.
If Mr Mehta embraces the Justice Department’s recommendations, Google will almost certainly appeal the punishments, prolonging a legal tussle that has dragged on for more than four years.
Besides seeking a Chrome spinoff and corralling of the Android software, the Justice Department wants the judge to ban Google from forging multibillion-dollar deals to lock in its dominant search engine as the default option on Apple’s iPhone and other devices.
Regulators also want Google to share data it collects from people’s queries with its rivals, giving them a better chance at competing with the tech giant.
The measures, if they are ordered, threaten to upend a business expected to generate more than 300 billion dollars (£236 billion) in revenue this year.
“The playing field is not level because of Google’s conduct, and Google’s quality reflects the ill-gotten gains of an advantage illegally acquired,” the US Justice Department asserted in its recommendations. “The remedy must close this gap and deprive Google of these advantages.”
It is still possible that the Justice Department could ease off attempts to break up Google, especially if Mr Trump takes the widely expected step of replacing Jonathan Kanter, who was appointed by Mr Biden to oversee the agency’s antitrust division.
Although the case targeting Google was originally filed during the final months of Mr Trump’s first term in office, Mr Kanter oversaw the high-profile trial that culminated in Mr Mehta’s ruling against Google.Working in tandem with Federal Trade Commission chair Lina Khan, Mr Kanter took a get-tough stance against Big Tech that triggered other attempted crackdowns on industry powerhouses such as Apple and discouraged business deals from getting done during the past four years.
Mr Trump recently expressed concerns that a breakup might destroy Google but did not elaborate on the alternative penalties he might have in mind.
“What you can do without breaking it up is make sure it’s more fair,” Mr Trump said last month.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel