Man
Professional
- Messages
- 3,061
- Reaction score
- 585
- Points
- 113
The corporation will face a very important choice that will change the entire industry forever.
The US Department of Justice has proposed to oblige Google to sell the Chrome browser in order to restore competition in the online search market. The option to separate Android also remains open. Such measures are aimed at eliminating Google's monopoly, which, according to the court, the company illegally holds in the field of search engines and advertising.
The proposal document clarifies possible steps to remedy the situation. The list of measures ranges from restrictions on certain agreements to more radical solutions, including the division of the company. Particular attention is paid to the separation of the Chrome browser, which the government sees as a key tool for Internet searches.
Although Android does not yet appear among the mandatory assets to be divided, such a possibility is being considered. Such a threat could be an incentive for Google to comply with the proposed rules, including banning the use of Android to promote its own search engine. If the proposed measures prove insufficient to restore competition, Android spin-off could also be implemented.
In addition, the Department of Justice demands that Google be prohibited from providing monetary rewards or other valuables to third-party companies, such as Apple or smartphone manufacturers, for setting its default search engine or restricting the work of competitors. It also proposes a ban on promoting its own search engine on the company's platforms, such as YouTube.
Other measures include giving competitors access to Google's search engine index based on marginal value, a commitment to share search results and query data from the U.S. for 10 years, and the ability for websites to opt out of having their content included in Google's AI reviews without deteriorating rankings in search results.
Google criticized the proposals. An Alphabet lawyer in a blog post called the Justice Department's actions "excessive" and said they threaten U.S. technology leadership. According to Google, the proposal to disclose both the company's innovations and user search queries could lead to the transfer of data to unknown companies, including foreign ones.
Another consequence of the proposals may be a reduction in investment in the development of artificial intelligence. Google noted that the company is a leader in this area, and restrictions could slow down the pace of innovation, which would negatively affect the global technological competitiveness of the United States.
One of the most discussed measures was the requirement for Google to implement two search engine selection screens on Pixel devices at once. The design of the screens must be approved by a specially created technical committee, which, according to the company, will lead to unnecessary interference in its activities.
Google intends to submit its proposals next month and will continue to defend its position going forward. Representatives of the company recalled that the court previously noted the high quality of the Google search engine, which has earned the trust of hundreds of millions of users around the world.
The Ministry of Justice plans to update its proposals by March, and a two-week trial to determine the final measures will take place in April. The court will have to decide how best to restore competition. It is noteworthy that the process is taking place against the backdrop of a change of administration in the Ministry of Justice, which may affect the final decisions. However, the case was started during the Trump administration, so the claims are long-term.
Microsoft recently accused Google of running a covert campaign to get approval from Europe's authorities and antitrust authorities. According to Microsoft, Google is deliberately hiding its role in the Open Cloud Coalition, a new lobbying group, in order to show the initiative as independent. According to Microsoft, Google founded a coalition, but deliberately brought small European companies to the forefront, hiding its own role in management and funding.
Source
The US Department of Justice has proposed to oblige Google to sell the Chrome browser in order to restore competition in the online search market. The option to separate Android also remains open. Such measures are aimed at eliminating Google's monopoly, which, according to the court, the company illegally holds in the field of search engines and advertising.
The proposal document clarifies possible steps to remedy the situation. The list of measures ranges from restrictions on certain agreements to more radical solutions, including the division of the company. Particular attention is paid to the separation of the Chrome browser, which the government sees as a key tool for Internet searches.
Although Android does not yet appear among the mandatory assets to be divided, such a possibility is being considered. Such a threat could be an incentive for Google to comply with the proposed rules, including banning the use of Android to promote its own search engine. If the proposed measures prove insufficient to restore competition, Android spin-off could also be implemented.
In addition, the Department of Justice demands that Google be prohibited from providing monetary rewards or other valuables to third-party companies, such as Apple or smartphone manufacturers, for setting its default search engine or restricting the work of competitors. It also proposes a ban on promoting its own search engine on the company's platforms, such as YouTube.
Other measures include giving competitors access to Google's search engine index based on marginal value, a commitment to share search results and query data from the U.S. for 10 years, and the ability for websites to opt out of having their content included in Google's AI reviews without deteriorating rankings in search results.
Google criticized the proposals. An Alphabet lawyer in a blog post called the Justice Department's actions "excessive" and said they threaten U.S. technology leadership. According to Google, the proposal to disclose both the company's innovations and user search queries could lead to the transfer of data to unknown companies, including foreign ones.
Another consequence of the proposals may be a reduction in investment in the development of artificial intelligence. Google noted that the company is a leader in this area, and restrictions could slow down the pace of innovation, which would negatively affect the global technological competitiveness of the United States.
One of the most discussed measures was the requirement for Google to implement two search engine selection screens on Pixel devices at once. The design of the screens must be approved by a specially created technical committee, which, according to the company, will lead to unnecessary interference in its activities.
Google intends to submit its proposals next month and will continue to defend its position going forward. Representatives of the company recalled that the court previously noted the high quality of the Google search engine, which has earned the trust of hundreds of millions of users around the world.
The Ministry of Justice plans to update its proposals by March, and a two-week trial to determine the final measures will take place in April. The court will have to decide how best to restore competition. It is noteworthy that the process is taking place against the backdrop of a change of administration in the Ministry of Justice, which may affect the final decisions. However, the case was started during the Trump administration, so the claims are long-term.
Microsoft recently accused Google of running a covert campaign to get approval from Europe's authorities and antitrust authorities. According to Microsoft, Google is deliberately hiding its role in the Open Cloud Coalition, a new lobbying group, in order to show the initiative as independent. According to Microsoft, Google founded a coalition, but deliberately brought small European companies to the forefront, hiding its own role in management and funding.
Source
