What Google Rivals Want After DOJ’s Antitrust Trial Win

In a significant victory for Google's longtime rivals like Yelp and DuckDuckGo, a federal judge ruled on Monday that the tech giant is an illegal monopoly. However, the celebration among these companies has been tempered with caution. They understand that while this ruling marks a pivotal moment, the battle to restore competition in the digital landscape is far from over. The next phase of the trial, where the judge will decide on remedies to address Google’s anticompetitive practices, will be crucial in determining the future of search services and online advertising.

A Monumental Win with Strings Attached

Jeremy Stoppelman, CEO of Yelp, acknowledged the importance of the ruling but emphasized the need for a robust follow-up. “While we’re heartened by the decision, a strong remedy is critical,” Stoppelman wrote in a blog post. His sentiment was echoed by DuckDuckGo’s senior vice president of public affairs, Kamyl Bazbaz, who noted, “We’ve passed a key milestone, but there’s still a lot of history to be written.”

These statements highlight a shared understanding that the judge’s decision on remedies will be just as impactful—if not more so—than the ruling itself. Judge Amit Mehta found that Google violated the Sherman Act by maintaining its dominant position through exclusionary contracts with phone and browser makers, securing its place as the default search engine. The remedies phase, set to begin in September, will determine how to restore competition in general search services and search text advertising. However, Google’s rivals fear that a weak remedy could render the victory meaningless.

Lessons from Europe: Implementation Matters

DuckDuckGo is particularly cautious, drawing from its experience with Europe’s antitrust efforts against Google. Although the European Union previously ruled that Google was a monopolist and introduced a “choice screen” to allow users to select their default search engine, the approach hasn’t significantly dented Google’s dominance. Bazbaz pointed out that while the concept was promising, Google found ways to sidestep its effectiveness. He emphasized that “the implementation details matter,” advocating for a more rigorous and consistent approach in the US.

One suggestion from DuckDuckGo is to make the choice screen appear periodically, rather than just during initial setup, to encourage users to reconsider their search engine preferences. Additionally, the company is calling for a ban on “dark pattern” popups that subtly guide users back to Google, a tactic that has not been adequately addressed in the EU.

The Remedies Rivals Want

The rivals have diverse ideas on how to effectively curb Google’s monopoly. Yelp’s Stoppelman believes that Google should be forced to spin off services that have benefited unfairly from its search monopoly. This, he argues, would be a straightforward and enforceable remedy to prevent future anticompetitive behavior. He also advocates for a ban on exclusive default search deals and an end to Google’s self-preferencing in search results.

DuckDuckGo, on the other hand, proposes more technical solutions. They suggest barring Google from buying default status or pre-installation deals, which would challenge the tech giant’s lucrative partnerships, such as its multibillion-dollar deal with Apple. Furthermore, DuckDuckGo wants Google to provide access to its search and ad APIs, leveling the playing field for competitors.

Other groups, particularly those representing publishers who rely on search for traffic, are also voicing their ideas. Jason Kint, CEO of Digital Content Next, suggested that separating Google’s Chrome and Android businesses could be a key solution. He argued that the data gathered from these platforms bolsters Google’s search engine, making it even more powerful. By disentangling these services, alternative search engines might stand a better chance of competing.

The Road Ahead: A New Tech Landscape?

The remedies phase of the trial is expected to be contentious and drawn out, especially with Google’s intention to appeal the ruling. Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, confirmed that the company plans to fight the decision, arguing that it unfairly penalizes Google for offering the best search engine.

Complicating matters further is the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence, which could significantly alter the search landscape in the coming years. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has indicated that any remedies must be forward-looking to account for such developments. Antitrust chief Jonathan Kanter has previously stated a preference for “structural remedies” in conduct cases—essentially, breaking up companies rather than merely imposing behavioral changes.

If the DOJ advocates for a broad remedy and Judge Mehta agrees, the outcome could dramatically reshape the tech industry. Stoppelman likened the potential impact to the landmark Microsoft antitrust case over two decades ago, which he said spurred an era of innovation, including the rise of Google itself. “It’s exciting to imagine the new technologies and innovation we’ll see emerge as a result of this ruling over the next decade and beyond,” Stoppelman wrote.

Conclusion: The Stakes Are High

The upcoming remedies phase of the Google antitrust trial will be crucial in determining whether the victory for its rivals will translate into real change. As DuckDuckGo and Yelp push for robust solutions that address both current and future challenges, the tech industry watches closely. The decisions made in the coming months could either reinforce Google’s dominance or pave the way for a more competitive digital landscape.

Stay tuned to Kushal Bharat Tech News for further updates on this landmark case and its implications for the tech industry.