DOJ and States Recommend Google Breakup in Latest Filing
Google should end its distribution agreements with companies like Apple, sell Chrome and potentially also sell Android, DOJ and nearly 40 state attorneys general said Wednesday in an antitrust lawsuit against the platform (see 2410220040).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Google President Kent Walker said Thursday that DOJ is pushing for antitrust remedies far beyond what's relevant in the case through a “radical interventionist agenda” that will harm U.S. innovation.
DOJ filed its proposed final remedies Wednesday with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (docket 1:20-cv-03010-APM). The proposal would bar Google from offering “anything of value” to device companies in exchange for default installation of Google Search.
The forced divestiture of Chrome would “permanently stop Google’s control of this critical search access point and allow rival search engines the ability to access the browser that for many users is a gateway to the internet,” said DOJ. The department claimed Google “manipulated its control of Chrome and Android to benefit itself, while sharing monopoly profits under conditions to induce third parties across the ecosystem to help Google maintain its monopolies.” This exclusionary conduct has made Google the default platform for search and “ensured that virtually all search access points route users’ valuable queries and interaction data to Google.”
The filing suggests the forced sale of Android could also help restore competition. DOJ said the plaintiffs, however, recognize the Android remedy will draw “significant objections from Google or other market participants.” Alternatives include behavioral remedies that would limit the company’s control of Android and ability to self-preference its products, said DOJ.
“DOJ’s wildly overbroad proposal goes miles beyond the Court’s decision,” said Walker. “It would break a range of Google products -- even beyond Search -- that people love and find helpful in their everyday lives.”
The forced sale of Chrome and potential sale of Android could endanger the privacy and security of millions of Americans, Walker added. It could expose proprietary information and user data to “unknown foreign and domestic companies,” he said. Walker spoke against DOJ’s proposal to appoint a technical committee that would "micromanage" the company’s business decisions. DOJ said the technical committee would allow the plaintiffs to monitor company decisions and ensure compliance with the court order.
The group of plaintiffs includes AGs from 35 states, the District of Columbia, Guam and Puerto Rico. States include Colorado, New York, Tennessee, Utah, Oklahoma, Vermont, Virginia and Wyoming. Connecticut Attorney General William Tong (D) said the proposal “lays out a series of fair and workable remedies to end Google’s illegal monopoly and restore competition.” Nebraska AG Mike Hilgers (R) noted the proposed remedies would force Google to share information with “certain rivals that it unlawfully obtained through its monopolistic practices.”
Public Knowledge applauded the proposed remedies. “Unbundling Android from Google products, or divesting it completely either voluntarily or in the event of noncompliance, creates opportunities for other app stores or services to compete more fairly,” said Policy Counsel Elise Phillips.
TechNet CEO Linda Moore said the proposal risks “raising prices for families, limiting competition, and discouraging the investments that drive new breakthroughs. Antitrust law should focus on protecting consumers and supporting a competitive marketplace, not holding back progress or stifling innovation.”
A hearing on the proposed remedies is scheduled to begin April 22 and conclude May 2.