In a landmark decision, Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court ruled Google violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by stifling competition and arranging exclusive and restrictive contracts with other companies. As Mehta wrote in his decision, “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.” Well, that’s plain enough.
Also: Google controls an illegal monopoly in internet search, US judge rules
Mehta found Google engaged in practices that prevented its rivals from competing fairly. He’s got a point. By StatCounter’s reckoning, Google owns the lion’s share of the search market with 91%, followed by Bing with a paltry 3.86%. DuckDuckGo? It’s trailing with a meager 0.62%.
In particular, Mehta criticized the company’s contracts with Apple, Samsung, other smartphone companies, and Mozilla — contracts that required them to use Google as the default search engine for their products. In particular, Google reportedly paid Apple $18 billion annually to secure its position as the default search engine on iOS devices. Other firms received over $8 billion a year to ensure that Google was their search engine of choice.
<!–>
Google, of course, denied that this was why its search engine was their pick. Google Global Affairs President Kent Walker replied, “This decision recognizes that Google offers the best search engine but concludes that we shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available.” Them’s fightin’ words!
What will this mean for users? In the short run, nothing. Google has already announced that it will appeal the decision.
What will it mean in the long run? Well, we’ll see. Before this, the only technology lawsuit of this scale was the Microsoft antitrust lawsuit, US versus Microsoft. In theory, Microsoft lost that case. In practice, Netscape died, and for over a decade, Internet Explorer was the browser of choice. For all practical purposes, Microsoft was the winner.
Also: How to delete yourself from internet search results and hide your identity online
In addition, the court has yet to propose any specific remedies to put Google in its place. For example, the court might force Google to break up its business operations, restrict its ability to enter into exclusive agreements, or make users decide when they first use a browser whether they want Google or another search engine.
Originally, in the Microsoft case, Microsoft was supposed to be broken up, but that was later overruled. Other remedies were put in place but amounted to little.
Google, in its case, may not be so lucky. Why? Because in this go-around Google is facing not just the courts and its old rivals Microsoft and Yahoo but a new generation of AI-driven search engines.
AI-powered search engines, such as OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Microsoft’s Bing Copilot, and Perplexity, have been gaining traction. These engines use large language models (LLMs) to understand and respond to user queries more naturally and intuitively.
Also: 3 ways Google just supercharged your Chrome browser with AI – and they’re surprisingly useful
This AI twist makes a big difference.
Back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, my first business – Researchers at Large – was based on my ability to master the primitive search engines of the day, such as NASA RECON, DIALOG, and OCLC. Things got easier with AltaVista and, eventually, Google. Even now, though, using Google effectively requires mastery of search techniques.
The engines still aren’t as good as I am, but they’re getting much closer. There’s a big enough difference from doing it yourself that I can see these chatbots giving Google a run for its money.
Of course, Google has tried its own AI-enabled search improvements. However, its efforts, especially AI Overview, have failed so far.
In addition, unlike Microsoft, Google’s main competitor, some experts have speculated that Google’s AI-driven search might not just damage content creators but Google’s own ad revenue. John Wihbey, associate professor of media innovation and technology at Northeastern University, thinks “Google might be cannibalizing their own revenue stream.”
Stasia research expert Tiago Bianchi agrees, writing that, “Errors performed by Bard during its release made Google lose around 100 billion US dollars in market value, despite other tools committing similar inaccuracies. Later, sresults on Google’s AI Overviews echoed the embarrassment.”
Also: How to turn on Private DNS Mode on Android – and what it can do for you
If this analysis is correct, AI-driven search may not be to Google’s advantage. However, its competitors – which aren’t wedded to an ad business model – might be perfectly happy to offer AI-based search.
Bianchi warns, though, that AI-driven search has yet to prove it can steal significant market share from Google. “Despite over a quarter of surveyed US adults trying and sustaining reasons for using AI-powered search tools across all generations, the majority remains unimpressed or skeptical about AI-tailored results. With little changes in the market share of big search companies, the trend sees more optimism among marketers, who strongly believe in the effectiveness of chat-based search advertising and reflect the enormous investments in the sector.”
He’s not alone. Chris Rodgers, CEO of the SEO firm CSP, told me, “Yesterday’s ruling could help Open AI down the line if Google’s appeals are unsuccessful. However, it is expected to be a long, drawn-out process. Google could end up seeing a loss of search-market share if they are removed as the default search engine on mobile devices; however, as long as it’s the search engine of choice for the majority of consumers, Google will remain the dominant search engine, even if OpenAI or other AI search-engines erode search-market share.”
Also: Your Google Search results are about to look very different. Here are 4 reasons why
Still, just as the Microsoft case judgment had the potential to change the web browser and PC market, this decision might change the search engine market. Certainly, the combination of AI search, a legal battle, and Google potentially losing its automatic position on iPhones and Android phones may change how we search.
Stay tuned. There’s more to come.
–>
Source: Robotics - zdnet.com
