What We Know so Far on Google’s Antitrust Case - Insights & Implications

The ongoing antitrust trial against Google has captured the attention of the tech world and beyond. Google CEO Sundar Pichai’s testimony marked a significant moment in this high-profile case. The U.S. government, in collaboration with states such as New York, California, and Colorado, launched this legal action back in January this year, targeting what they believe to be Google’s dominant control over the digital advertising market. 

The core of the government's argument is that Google’s practices hinder competitors from accessing vital data, stifling their ability to improve their offerings and builds upon a 2020 antitrust claim that scrutinised Google's dominance in online search.

Ultimately, it narrows down to one basic inquiry: What search engine do you opt for, and what are your reasons for choosing it?

Google stands firm in its defence, maintaining that it’s the best search engine out there and its business practices and partnerships are legitimate business strategies. The tech giant argues that its position as the preferred default engine is a reflection of its quality and user preference rather than any anticompetitive behaviour. 

However, the DOJ and attorneys general from nearly every state and territory in the USA argue that Google’s dominance stems from its substantial financial agreements with a wide range of companies - including Apple and Verizon. These agreements, totalling billions annually, ensure Google remains the default search engine on a majority of devices and browsers. Although Google has not disclosed the precise figure, it was revealed during the trial that in 2021 alone the company spent a staggering £22 billion to ensure its default search engine status across multiple platforms. During the same period, it generated £121 billion in revenue from search ads. The majority of that money is believed to go to Apple.

The intricacies of Google’s relationship with Apple were laid bare during the trial, particularly Google's commitment not to promote its Chrome browser to Safari users. This agreement played a crucial role in ensuring Apple did not switch to a competitor or offer browser choices during iPhone setups.

The trial brought to the forefront Google’s early understanding of the influence of default settings. A 2007 email, presented during the trial, demonstrated the impact of making Google the default search engine, leading to a considerable increase in Google searches. Competitors argued that such strategies have stifled their growth, suggesting that they could have been more formidable contenders had they been able to secure similar arrangements.

The trial revealed Google's ambitions to expand its influence, with Sundar Pichai admitting to attempts in 2018 to have Google preinstalled on iOS devices. This move was intended to deepen the integration between Google and Apple’s services, but Apple declined the proposal, maintaining its policy against preloading third-party software.

An aspect of the trial that raised eyebrows was Google's policy regarding the deletion of internal chat messages. The company faced scrutiny over its compliance with litigation holds, a topic that became a point of contention during Pichai’s testimony.