Court rules Google’s search engine dominance is antitrust violation and illegal

A US federal judge has ruled that Google acted illegally to harm competition and protect its monopoly on internet search and related media. Monday's landmark decision brought down Alphabet, Google's parent company, and will reshape how the tech company does business. 

 Google was sued by the Department of Justice in the United States in 2020 for controlling about 90% of the Internet search market. 

 This is one of many lawsuits filed against major tech companies as anti-US regulators try to boost competition in the industry.

In this case, US District Judge Amit Mehta said that Google has paid billions to bring modern search engines and browsers.

 "Google is the owner and has acted to protect its rights," Judge Mehta wrote in his 277 opinion. 

 Alphabet plans to appeal the ruling, Reuters reported. 

 United States Attorney General Merrick Garland, the nation's top attorney, called the decision "a historic victory for the American people." 

 "No company is above the law - no matter how big or powerful," Mr Garland said on Monday. "The Department of Justice will continue to enforce our antitrust laws." 

 Federal prosecutors have filed another lawsuit against Big Tech companies, including Meta Platforms, which runs Facebook, Amazon.com and Apple Inc, accusing them of operating as monopolies, Decision Monday born after a 10-week trial in Washington. Prosecutors have accused Google of spending billions of dollars a year on Apple, Samsung, Mozilla and others to maintain the search engine standard, meaning other companies don't have the space or resources to compete effectively with . . during the process. 

 Google's search engine is a major revenue generator for the company, bringing in billions of dollars from ads that appear on its search results pages. 

 Google's lawyer defended the company by saying that users are attracted to the search engine because they find it useful and that Google is investing money to make it better. for customers. 

 "Google won because it was good," Google lawyer John Schmidtlein said during closing arguments earlier this year. 

 Mr. Schmidtlein argued during the hearing that Google still faces strong competition, not only from large search firms such as Microsoft's Bing, but also from websites and specialized applications that people use it to find hotels, airlines, and more.

 Judge Mehta concluded that the search engine was a "real estate asset" for Google. 

 "Even if the new entrant is in a good position to seek damages when the deal closes, such a company can compete if it is willing to pay shares worth billions of dollars to partners," Judge Mehta wrote. 

 It is unclear what penalties Google will face as a result of this decision. 

 The government asked for "structural aid" - which could mean the collapse of the company. 

 trials against technology companies and new cases related to media technology will begin in September. Meanwhile, in a case in Europe, Google is being fined billions.