“WASHINGTON (AP) — A judge on Monday ruled that Google’s ubiquitous search engine has been illegally exploiting its dominance to squash competition and stifle innovation in a seismic decision that could shake up the internet and hobble one of the world’s best-known companies…”

  • @Ilandar@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    10511 months ago

    This is based on older evidence but the exclusive deal Google just signed with reddit makes it pretty clear the monopoly is planned and ongoing.

    • @MimicJar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      3011 months ago

      The funny thing is that this probably screws Reddit more than anyone. Obviously fuck 'em but funny either way.

      • @Ilandar@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        811 months ago

        It depends on the conditions of the agreement and how much they are being paid. Google’s worldwide market share is above 91% so reddit isn’t actually losing out on much site traffic by going exclusive.

        • @MimicJar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          611 months ago

          Sure, but if the argument is that Google is paying to be a monopoly then they’re going to have to stop payment.

          Google allegedly paid $60 million for access to Reddit for AI purposes. Reddit then disallowed access to all other providers, unless they can promise they won’t use the data for AI purposes.

          Technically Reddit is the one disallowing access, but if the argument is that Google is paying for special access I don’t see why I wouldn’t extend to AI.

          Reddit now needs to either argue their data is some special intellectual property worth $60 million or is at a price point more accessible and it sure as shit won’t be $60 million.

          • @Ilandar@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            511 months ago

            Reddit then disallowed access to all other providers, unless they can promise they won’t use the data for AI purposes.

            That’s what they said publicly, but even search providers like Mojeek that have no AI capabilities appear to require some sort of “commercial agreement” to allow reddit scraping moving forward. It seems to me that Google was attempting to further distance itself from the competition with the agreement and that reddit went along with it because, in some way, it makes financial sense for reddit too.

            • @MimicJar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              311 months ago

              That’s what I find so interesting about this result.

              For example Apple is paid ~$20 billion, or arguably charges that amount, to be the default search engine. That’s REAL money when compared to the Reddit deal.

    • @Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 months ago

      If the fine is not large enough to impact their business then breaking the law will be a normal business decision and fines a simple business expense. It’s already like that.

  • Melody Fwygon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    6211 months ago

    Even if the punishment is largely symbolic and Google only pays a tiny (compared to it’s massive size) fine; I’d still call that a significant win.

    • Google can be REQUIRED to give users A CHOICE of Search Engines.
    • Google can be FORBIDDEN from giving their OWN ENGINE an advantage in search results or advertising
    • Google can be FORCED to ALLOW THIRD PARTIES access to the SAME APIs used in Chrome and Chromium.
    • Google can be FORBIDDEN from BLOCKING THIRD PARTY FRONTENDS from using Google Search, Youtube and more.
    • Schadrach
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 months ago

      Google can be REQUIRED to give users A CHOICE of Search Engines.

      Don’t they, err, already do this?

      I mean a search engine is literally just a website and absolutely nothing prevents you from just going to duckduckgo.com or bing.com or wherever. Don’t think Chrome prevents you from accessing other search engines in general, and last time I used it (admittedly a while back) it had a setting to change the search engine used by default if you just typed something into the address bar.

      • Melody Fwygon
        link
        fedilink
        English
        211 months ago

        Don’t they, err, already do this?

        No, They don’t. They have stolen that initial choice from you by paying companies to be the “default” choice. They do this to capture those who are lazy or indolent about their choices, or to entrap those who are too un-savvy to change the preference.

        • Schadrach
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 months ago

          You do know there’s a big difference between a “default” option and a “mandatory” setting, right? Specifically that you do, in fact, have a choice to change a default?

          Not forcing the user to proactively make a choice is not the same thing as denying the user the ability to choose.

  • Eggyhead
    link
    fedilink
    5711 months ago

    Websites and articles that have nothing to do with search or Google have to be designed specifically for Google’s search algorithm. I think that’s pretty crazy.

    • @CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      911 months ago

      Not to mention googles push for an identification standard that would effectively ban any non chromium browser from all major websites.

    • wuphysics87
      link
      fedilink
      311 months ago

      Interestingly, SEO is increased with semantic HTML which benefits people who need screen readers since it is easier to parse. But, also. Fuck google

    • Possibly linux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I can’t wait until Adobe, Shopify and every other company that’s been screwed over get called in to testify

  • @ItsComplicated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    1911 months ago

    The judge said it was a monopoly but there does not seem to be any consequences at this time if ever.

    Mehta’s conclusion that Google has been running an illegal monopoly sets up another legal phase to determine what sorts of changes or penalties should be imposed to reverse the damage done and restore a more competitive landscape.

    The potential outcome could result in a wide-ranging order requiring Google to dismantle some of the pillars of its internet empire or prevent it from paying to ensure its search engine automatically answers queries on the iPhone and other devices. Or, the judge could conclude only modest changes are required to level the playing field.

    • mosscap
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1011 months ago

      Today was not about determining consequences / repercussions. It was only about deciding yes or no on the monopoly issue. The next step in the legal process is determining repercussions for Alphabet, and it seems like there are some pretty dramatic options on the table.

  • Barx [none/use name]
    link
    fedilink
    1911 months ago

    Wonder what will happen to Firefox if this ruling means Google can’t pay them to default to their search engine. That’s a large chunk of their funding.

    • sovietknuckles [they/them]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Wonder what will happen to Firefox if this ruling means Google can’t pay them to default to their search engine.

      Yahoo was Firefox’s default search engine between 2014 and 2017. It would have lasted longer, but Verizon’s acquisition of Yahoo prompted Mozilla to terminate it. They can sign a deal with another search engine if the deal with Google falls through. In China, Baidu is the default search engine, and in Russia, Yandex is.

      Certainly Google will be more careful after this ruling, but nothing will actually go into effect at least for several years, if it ever does, because Google is appealing.

      That’s a large chunk of their funding.

      That’s true. When Mozilla resumed their search deal with Google in 2017, Google provided 91% of their revenue. But the percent of Mozilla’s revenue derived from Google has decreased every year since then, most recently at 81% as of 2022.

  • Possibly linux
    link
    fedilink
    English
    911 months ago

    Google search is a monopoly? It is losing market share. They really should go after Chrome and its clones

      • Possibly linux
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        True I suppose

        I just don’t like how Chrome is the “standard”

        • @TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Then you should also not like how Google has a history of making their sites, which are market leaders in many cases including search, perform worse on browsers other than Chrome. That is considered anti-competitive behavior.

  • SomeAmateur
    link
    fedilink
    English
    711 months ago

    It might not be much but it’s still legal precedent that will hopefully help it reach critical mass. Like getting Al Capone on tax evasion

      • /home/pineapplelover
        link
        fedilink
        1411 months ago

        Also why? Searxng is a thing. I would argue search wouldn’t need to be federated. Makes sense for social media, web is already connected.

        • atro_city
          link
          fedilink
          711 months ago

          Isn’t searxng just a proxy for google and bing? Not sure how that “increases diversity” or “adds competition” or “improves search results”…

          • /home/pineapplelover
            link
            fedilink
            211 months ago

            It can proxy anything you want to. There are a lot of searxng instances out there who have different setups. You could proxy only google or all the search engines that exist. Up to you. Ideally, I would make it so searxng can operate independently and have their own search engine algorithm but so far, this is the most open source and self hostable option available.

            • atro_city
              link
              fedilink
              111 months ago

              That’s great an all, but it doesn’t change the market one bit. Nearly all “alternative” search engines are bing proxies already. When bing went down a month or so ago, many of those “alternatives” went down too. Even the ones that supposedly had their own indices. I know this because I was using an alternative that simply went down too.

              Searxng just serves as a proxy in front of a proxy.

          • @montar@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            111 months ago

            In fact it improves search results, when you have multiple search engines turned on searxng does some sorting or filtering thing and manages to filter out lots SEO crap and ads from search.

        • atro_city
          link
          fedilink
          111 months ago

          Had a look: it’s 20 years and maintained by one single dude. Do you think one dude could compete with google? He needs help, and a lot of it.

          • atro_city
            link
            fedilink
            411 months ago

            No, I mean the tech behind it, not the concept. The bittorrent application is able to find a file to download from a bunch of other people. Not only the file itself, but parts of it. It’s a distributed search.

            • @montar@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              111 months ago

              torrents have trackers, special servers that keep track of who’s got which parts of a file.

            • @doodledup@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              011 months ago

              This works because it’s the same file just distributed. But in the case of search, every node would need to have the entire index of the web. If not, how would the client decide who’s index is better and which page rank fits better with the search? I really don’t see how this would work.

  • @milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    611 months ago

    After reviewing [evidence from] Google, Microsoft and Apple… Mehta [gave a verdict]

    Really, this is just a win for Facebhook?