Ending Google's illegal monopoly How Americans search the webThe US Justice Department wants the tech giant to end its lucrative partnership with Apple, share a trove of proprietary data with competitors and advertisers, and sell off Google's search engine “immediately and completely,” Google's search engine more than half Of American market. The government wants Google to sell Chrome to a buyer it approves, arguing that divestment would “open monopolized markets to competition, remove barriers to entry, and ensure that illegal monopolies do not result in There should be no tradition left.”

The recommendations are part of a detailed plan that government lawyers presented Wednesday to U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C., as part of a federal antitrust case against Google that began in 2020. By next August, Mehta is expected to decide which of these are potential measures Google should take to loosen its grip on the search market.

But the tech giant can still appeal, which could delay implementation of the judge's order by years. Google has done it before argued The expected proposals would jeopardize the privacy and security of its users and make its services less convenient.

Among people who have worked for Google or partnered closely with the company, there is little consensus that any of the proposed measures will significantly change user behavior or make the search engine market more competitive. Will make. Four former Google executives who oversaw teams working on Chrome, search, and ads told WIRED That innovation by competitors, no interference by governmentThis remains the surest way to depose Google as the country's dominant Internet search provider. “You can't shove a substandard product down people's throats,” says a former Chrome business leader, speaking on condition of anonymity to protect professional relationships.

But a former Chrome engineering leader admitted that the search engine could have been a better product if it weren't beholden to Google's other business interests. They allege that Google blocked the introduction of user-friendly features because it would have harmed the company's advertising revenue, which depends on people clicking on ads in its search results. “Why isn't autocomplete better? Why isn't the 'new tab' page more effective? Why isn’t browser history better?” says the former leader, who also spoke on condition of anonymity. Answer: “These are all incentives to motivate users to search.” Google did not respond to a request for comment on the claim.

Nevertheless, competitors who would benefit from even a slight reduction in Google's power are optimistic about the expected measures. “I can see strong gains in investment [Chrome] Back into the hands of the community,'' says Guillermo Rauch, CEO of Vercel, a company that develops tools for websites, many of which depend on search traffic and advertising revenue controlled by Google. “To soften that relationship with corporate overlords will always be a healthy thing,” says Rauch.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *