To end Google’s illegal monopoly on how Americans search the web, the US Justice Department wants the tech giant to end its lucrative partnership with Apple, a trove of proprietary data with competitors and advertisers. share, and “immediately and completely discontinue Chrome,” Google’s The search engine that controls half of the US market. The government wants Google to sell Chrome to a buyer it approves, arguing that it would “open monopolistic markets to competition, remove barriers to entry, and will ensure that no such practice remains as a result of an illegal monopoly.”
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 lawsuit against Google set to begin in 2020. Possible remedies Google will need to take to reduce its grip on the search market.
But the tech giant could still appeal, delaying the implementation of the judge’s order for years in the future. Google has previously argued that the proposed proposals would threaten the privacy and security of its users and make its services less convenient.
Among those who have worked for Google or worked closely with the company, there is little agreement on whether any of the proposed remedies will significantly change user behavior or the search engine market. will make it more competitive. Four former Google executives who oversaw teams working on Chrome, search and advertising told Wired that innovation by competitors, not government intervention, was all that was driving Google’s demise as the nation’s dominant Internet search provider. There is a surefire way. “You can’t shove an inferior 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 hadn’t neglected Google’s other business interests. They allege that Google blocked the introduction of user-friendly features because they would hurt 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 efficient? Why isn’t browser history better? says the former leader, who also spoke on condition of anonymity. The answer: “Users. These are all incentives to search for.” Google did not respond to a request for comment on the claim.
Still, rivals benefiting from even a slight reduction in Google’s power are optimistic about the expected remedy. “I can see strong benefits in putting. [Chrome] is back in the hands of the community,” says Guillermo Rauch, CEO of Vercel, a company that develops tools for websites, many of which rely on search traffic and ad revenue that Google’s “It’s always a healthy thing to moderate that relationship with corporate owners,” says Rauch.
