In its quest to become the world's dominant online search engine, Google worked to minimize public oversight and media exposure of its efforts to illegally make itself No. 1 through shady financial leverage agreements with other major multinational corporations such as Apple and Samsung.
"This enabled Google to set itself as the default search engine across numerous devices, an advantage that Judge Mehta found to be unfairly limiting competition," reported Reclaim the Net.
"The financial scope of these agreements was substantial, with Google disbursing over $26 billion in 2021 to secure default status on various devices, a practice that the court criticized for lacking legitimate justification."
While Judge Mehta's ruling stops short of actually punishing Google for its crimes, it does suggest that Google could run into trouble in the future. Google is also expected to appeal the decision, which could mean that the case will eventually be tossed.
(Related: Last year, we shared evidence showing that Google is trying to rig the 2024 election by making certain candidates, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., invisible in search results.)
Google conveniently deleted internal communications evidence
In its defense, Google is arguing via its lawyers that many online platforms, i.e., TikTok and Amazon, do the very same things that Google does to maintain a monopoly.
Google claims its search services are simply superior to those of competitors like Microsoft's Bing, which is why many default search engine agreements put Google first on the list.
Where Google could run into problems trying to defend itself is in the internal communications department. Conveniently, Google failed to preserve chat records that would likely implicate it for the crimes alleged.
Judge Mehta expressed disappointment that Google failed to preserve these communications records, but in the end, he opted not to sanction the company for apparently destroying evidence.
First filed in 2020 during the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) "pandemic" by the Department of Justice (DOJ), the lawsuit has expanded from its original jurisdiction to now include multiple states and territories. Whatever happens with the case is sure to massively influence the future of internet governance, said government attorney Kenneth Dintzer.
Transparency advocates have long criticized Google for its shady monopolistic behavior. Google, meanwhile, has long argued that any attempts at holding the company accountable for such behavior cannot be allowed to occur because it risks exposing Google's "sensitive trade secrets."
"After having carefully considered and weighed the witness testimony and evidence, the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly," Judge Mehta said in his ruling.
The case is just one peg in a much larger legal mosaic that governments around the world are using to try to gain a foothold into regulating the world of Big Tech. Admittedly, Big Tech is largely a free for all where the players with the most cash are doing whatever they wish, including trying to stamp out certain forms of free speech that threaten their interests.
North Carolina Attorney General Josh Stein praised Judge Mehta's ruling, calling it "the biggest antitrust victory in a generation."
Should Google end up facing more competition in the future, online advertising costs will likely decrease, which Stein says is a major win for consumers.
"We have all suffered degradation of our personal privacy because Google, given its dominance, is able to suck up more and more and more information about everything about us – and then market that information to advertisers – and charge all of us in the economy more money as a result," Stein further said.
Google is evil. Learn more at Evil.news.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.
