"Mehta concluded that Google maintained an illegal monopoly in the online search and search advertising markets through exclusive contracts and other anticompetitive tactics. However, he decided that the government's push for divestiture -- calling for Google to sell off Chrome or Android -- was "overreaching" and not appropriately justified, declaring such a remedy "incredibly messy" and unsupported by direct evidence."
"He added that in the case of Chrome, "The court's task is to discern between conduct that maintains a monopoly through anticompetitive acts as distinct from "growth or development as a consequence of a superior product, business acumen, or historic accident." Instead, Mehta has barred Google from striking or maintaining exclusive deals with phone and browser makers that guarantee its search engine as the default option."
Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by stifling competition and maintaining an illegal monopoly in online search and search advertising through exclusive contracts and anticompetitive tactics. The court prohibited Google from making or maintaining exclusive default search deals with phone and browser makers, disrupting long-standing agreements with Apple, Samsung, and Mozilla. Google may still pay for preferred placement but only under non-exclusive agreements. The judge rejected DOJ requests for divestiture of Chrome, Android, or ad assets as overreaching and unsupported by direct evidence. Google is expected to appeal.
Read at ZDNET
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]