In one of the tech world’s biggest anti-trust cases in decades, Google is set to defend itself against the US Government over claims it used its market dominance to make exclusive deals and quash competition.

The US Justice Department is set to show in court how Google, owned by Alphabet, paid billions to Apple, broadband companies, and browser makers to keep Google as the default search engine on their devices and platforms.

This, they are expected to say, has depleted competitors’ abilities to compete in the search engine marketplace.

It will be argued that Google has used its dominant market position to quash competition, though Google denies all the claims.

Judge Amit Mehta dropped certain charges made against Google, including a charge that its search results page design hurt competitors specialising in travel recommendations and customer reviews.

However, its other practices will come under fire in the court of law. Judge Mehta did acknowledge that Google is so ubiquitous in the public mind that “dictionaries recognize it as a verb,” he said in an opinion released in August, as reported by The Guardian.

Despite acknowledging Google’s dominance – its 90% market share as of 2020 and the fact that advertisers spend more than $80 billion annually to reach users on search results – Mehta is tasking the Justice Department to prove that Google breached anti-trust laws in every argued instance, rather than presenting a case of overall market dominance as being anti-trust.

“A company with monopoly power acts unlawfully only when its conduct stifles competition,” he reportedly wrote.

The case mainly hinges on Google’s payment of £1.2bn to Apple to ensure it was the default search engine on the company’s default browser, Safari, as well as similar payments to other browsers.

Further, Google applications are already defaulted and installed on different Android phones and other browsers, which the US government will claim has resulted in less competition and consumer choice, as well as stifling innovation.

Google has retorted that browsers and phones are “choosing” Google as their default search engine to offer the “highest quality” to their customers.

Recommended reading

• Apple App Store Policies Under Scrutiny in CMA Probe
• Are Google’s Digital Advertising Methods Anti-Competitive?
• Google and Apple Face CMA Probe over Mobile Browser Market ‘Duopoly’ 

While making exclusive contracts with vendors and suppliers is not against the law and is in fact a common business practice, these deals can break anti-trust laws if a company has enough market power that it can prevent rivals from entering or participating in the market.

The burden of the case will therefore be on the Justice Department to show that Google’s dealings have hindered search engine competition and stifled rivals.

This may not prove so difficult, in fact: in 2020, the UK Competition and Markets Authority completed a market study into digital advertising, saying the Apple-Google deal created a “significant barrier” to other search engines entering the market.

A similar consumer lawsuit is taking place against Google’s digital advertising practices, saying that the company used its market dominance to up prices for advertisers which ultimately increased consumer prices.

While the US lawsuit is not seeking financial compensation, it could give the government powers to stop Google’s ability to make exclusive deals, and even allow them to break up the company to an extent.