The landmark antitrust trial against Google has concluded, with a federal judge hearing final arguments that could potentially shift the power dynamics in the tech industry. Judge Amit P. Mehta, who presided over the case, acknowledged the significance of the trial not only for Google but for the public as well.
The case, brought by the Justice Department and state attorneys general, alleges that Google has abused its monopoly over the search business, stifling competition and limiting innovation. Google, on the other hand, denies these claims.
During the closing arguments, Judge Mehta grilled both sides and demanded explanations on how their positions align with legal precedents. The ruling, expected in the coming weeks or months, could have far-reaching implications for other antitrust lawsuits against tech giants like Apple, Amazon, and Meta.
The government’s case against Google centers on the company’s alleged monopoly in search, including deals with tech partners to feature the Google search engine in their products. The discussion also focused on Google’s dominance in search ads, with the government arguing that the company controls the market.
Google defended itself by pointing to competitors in the search and advertising space, such as Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok. Judge Mehta questioned the government’s argument, asking why search ads were considered different from ads on social platforms like Facebook.
In a surprising twist, Judge Mehta mentioned TikTok’s success and its ad platform, hinting at national security concerns about the app. He also raised concerns about Google’s document retention policy, suggesting that the company’s practices may need to be reevaluated.
As the tech industry awaits Judge Mehta’s ruling, the outcome of this case could set a precedent for future antitrust actions against big tech companies, shaping the landscape of competition and innovation in the digital world.
