DOJ and 11 state AGs, all Republican, file a suit alleging that Google acted anticompetitively to preserve monopolies in search and search advertising
not because they're forced to or because they can't find alternatives. We will have a full statement this morning. Adam Kovacevich / @adamkovac : A few peanut-gallery thoughts on DOJ v Google as a veteran of Google #antitrust, based on DOJ preview in WSJ 1/ https://www.wsj.com/... @alecstapp : 🚨 The DOJ's antitrust complaint against Google is out! Thread with some of my initial reactions as I go through it... https://twitter.com/... Justice Department / @thejusticedept : “Today, millions of Americans rely on the Internet and online platforms...Competition in this industry is vitally important, which is why today's challenge against Google...for violating antitrust laws is a monumental case both for the DOJ and for the American people.” — AG Barr https://twitter.com/... Daisuke Wakabayashi / @daiwaka : 2) curious about the effectiveness of google's argument that its deals with apple, carriers and other handset makers are like Coke buying supermarket shelf space. easy to understand but doesn't feel right since LOTS of people drink Pepsi and other sodas. Not the case w/ search Cecilia Kang / @ceciliakang : Nothing really changes after Nov. 3. Expect a potential Biden administration to be as interested in a case against Google as the Trump administration. Career lawyers under Barr balked at his approach. But they believe strongly in a case. @googlepubpolicy : The DOJ's deeply flawed lawsuit would do nothing to help consumers. It could actually raise phone prices, make it harder for people to access the services they want, and artificially prop up lower quality search services. Read our blog post→https://blog.google/ ... Elizabeth Warren / @senwarren : Two things can both be true: Bill Barr is a corrupt Trump crony who shouldn't be AG, and @TheJusticeDept has the power to pursue a legit antitrust suit against Google. The case is clear - in fact, it could have gone further. It must move forward without political interference. https://twitter.com/... Rep. Nadler / @repjerrynadler : There is bipartisan agreement in Congress and among federal and state antitrust enforcers that protecting competition and innovation online is essential to our economy. Today's antitrust lawsuit against Google is an important step for ensuring a competitive online space. 1/2 https://twitter.com/... Lance Gooden / @lancegooden : This is a great FIRST STEP in holding Big Tech accountable. https://twitter.com/... Kent Walker / @kent_walker : People don't use Google because they have to — they use it because it's helpful. People have endless options when it comes to accessing information online, and they can switch or download alternative search engines in a matter of seconds. https://blog.google/... Ben Thompson / @benthompson : 1975: Microsoft founded ~22 years later~ 1997: US v Microsoft filed — 1998: Google founded ~22 years later~ 2020: US v Google filed *************************** Apparently being sued for antitrust is like graduating from college for tech companies.
Wall Street Journal
Context & Ripple Effects
This filing lands after months of buildup: the DOJ had signaled since spring that it would move against Google's search and ad businesses, and September reporting showed about a dozen mostly-GOP states weighing whether to join the federal case or file their own complaints. The choice by 11 Republican AGs to sign on gives the suit bipartisan-in-part cover even before any Democratic-led states commit.
The case opens what becomes a multi-front legal campaign: weeks later a bipartisan group of 38 attorneys general files a third antitrust suit targeting search and the Apple distribution deals, and by 2023 nine more states pile onto the DOJ's own case when it expands into ad tech.
First-order effects
Google now faces a federal monopolization case over search and search advertising, with the DOJ and 11 Republican state AGs as co-plaintiffs and the company's default-placement agreements as the likely evidentiary core.
The states that held back from joining keep their option open to sue separately, per the Bloomberg reporting, meaning Google could face overlapping complaints with different plaintiffs and remedies.
Second-order effects
Apple's role as a paid default-distribution partner puts it in the crosshairs of follow-on litigation, which is exactly where the 38-AG suit goes weeks later.
Advertisers and publishers gain negotiating leverage if regulators force changes to how search ads are auctioned and distributed, pressuring Google's highest-margin revenue line.
Third-order effects
If the pattern holds — federal suit, then broader state coalitions, then an ad-tech expansion with nine additional states joining in 2023 — enforcement against Big Tech shifts from single-market cases to a sustained, multi-jurisdiction campaign aimed at unwinding platform-wide dominance.
A successful challenge to paid-default distribution would restructure how search engines reach users, moving the industry away from exclusive placement deals toward contestable defaults across browsers and devices.
The trend: US antitrust enforcement is converging on Big Tech's distribution lock-ins, with state AGs escalating from joining federal cases to running parallel campaigns of their own.
Today's lawsuit by the Department of Justice is deeply flawed. People use Google because they choose to — not because they're forced to or because they can't find alternatives. We will have a full statement this morning.
“Today, millions of Americans rely on the Internet and online platforms...Competition in this industry is vitally important, which is why today's challenge against Google...for violating antitrust laws is a monumental case both for the DOJ and for the American people.” — AG Barr …
2) curious about the effectiveness of google's argument that its deals with apple, carriers and other handset makers are like Coke buying supermarket shelf space. easy to understand but doesn't feel right since LOTS of people drink Pepsi and other sodas. Not the case w/ search
Nothing really changes after Nov. 3. Expect a potential Biden administration to be as interested in a case against Google as the Trump administration. Career lawyers under Barr balked at his approach. But they believe strongly in a case.
Two things can both be true: Bill Barr is a corrupt Trump crony who shouldn't be AG, and @TheJusticeDept has the power to pursue a legit antitrust suit against Google. The case is clear - in fact, it could have gone further. It must move forward without political interference. ht…
The DOJ's deeply flawed lawsuit would do nothing to help consumers. It could actually raise phone prices, make it harder for people to access the services they want, and artificially prop up lower quality search services. Read our blog post→https://blog.google/ ...
People don't use Google because they have to — they use it because it's helpful. People have endless options when it comes to accessing information online, and they can switch or download alternative search engines in a matter of seconds. https://blog.google/...
1975: Microsoft founded ~22 years later~ 1997: US v Microsoft filed — 1998: Google founded ~22 years later~ 2020: US v Google filed *************************** Apparently being sued for antitrust is like graduating from college for tech companies.
There is bipartisan agreement in Congress and among federal and state antitrust enforcers that protecting competition and innovation online is essential to our economy. Today's antitrust lawsuit against Google is an important step for ensuring a competitive online space. 1/2 http…
Coming up for air with a few thoughts on today's DOJ lawsuit 1) Clearly, doj is using the microsoft playbook and case may hinge on whether google can argue successfully that changing search defaults remain as big of an impediment as it was to change browsers in the 90s and 00s
Google's monopoly in search is a menace to society. They've steadily been making search worse by eroding the distinction between ads and organic results, pushing their own services over better alternatives, and shaking down companies for their trademarks. https://www.theverge.com…
General-purpose search might be the closest thing we have to a natural monopoly in online consumer services, and competition policy should focus on protecting other lines of business from the natural monopoly and not pretending that anybody can build a competitor.
2) The timing of this stinks, as does the partisan makeup of the states involved. As we have been documenting, YouTube has some of the least effective policies around election disinformation and it's hard to imagine they strengthen these under threat. https://www.eipartnership.ne…
That doesn't mean that there isn't room for new competitors at the specialized margins, or in related businesses (like Yelp), but if Microsoft can't compete after decades and billions, then it is fantasy to think DOJ action creates the space for five general search engines.
Google makes a copy of the public internet, parses it in close to real-time, builds incredibly complex models that have to match the taxonomy of knowledge across the entire species in many many languages and regions, and does so when millions are doing adversarial SEO.
VCs don't decline to fund Google Search competitors because Google pays browsers for customer acquisition, but because competing against the general use of Google is lunacy. 10 slide pitch deck, slide 4: First, we will purchase 5 exabytes of storage in 20 global datacenters.
Two things on the Google antitrust suit. 1) As a technologist, something that is really lacking from the complaint is a recognition that Google Search is dominant because building a competitor is *spectacularly difficult*! https://twitter.com/...
A reminder that the tech industry is by no means the only one with a monopoly problem. Just 4 companies control: -85% of beef industry -85% of corn seed market -84% of pesticide/herbicide market Not to mention news media, health care, airlines, internet providers etc. https://twi…
OK, to sum up: DOJ says Google protects its search monopoly through anti-competitive behavior, primarily exclusionary contracts. Search monopoly leads to advertising monopoly. All this makes search worse for users and ads worse for advertisers.
At a press briefing, the Justice Department hailed its antitrust lawsuit against Google as a “milestone” in efforts to foster competition, but emphasized that this isn't a stopping point — suggesting it may pursue other monopoly cases against tech giants. https://www.nytimes.com/…
Poor Amazon. “Google's anti-forking provisions and policies limited the growth of Amazon's mobile phone, and of Fire OS, because major manufacturers declined to support Amazon's phone out of fear doing so would risk their lucrative deals with Google.”
Paragraph 13 of DOJ's filing v Google does a good job of summarising some (not all) of the consequences of Google's market position https://www.justice.gov/... https://twitter.com/...
CENSORSHIP: @RealDonaldTrump should demand FTC and DOJ immediately INVESTIGATE Twitter, Facebook, Google fraudulent business practices! Section 230 is no immunity against fraud. https://twitter.com/...
The US Google antitrust fling. Very narrow scope - nothing on ads/bundling/self-preferencing at all. Purely focused on TAC and paying for/obliging status as default search. The UK CMA also called this out as a barrier to search competition. But... https://www.justice.gov/...
The DOJ's lawsuit against Google asks the court to “enter structural relief as needed to cure any anticompetitive harm” but officials declined to detail what that could mean in this case https://variety.com/...
This will be the most important antitrust suit in a generation. As the first state attorney general in the country to launch an antitrust investigation of @Google, I applaud this suit as desperately needed and long overdue. #BigTech's free pass is over https://twitter.com/...