Google is in more danger than ever of being broken up

After half a decade of fighting in order to keep her empire together, she wears a thin Google defenses.

The company faces an initial war that can mainly reshape its business, and the US Department of Justice argues to open new opportunities for its competitors. Last year, a federal judge considered Google that Google is an illegal monopolist in the online search market, and last week, a different judge announced that he had monopolized the advertising technology market as well. On Monday, the matter will face a new stage in that first battle: a three -week trial in Washington, DC, to determine the appropriate treatments to restore competition to search online.

Google has pledged to stab both rulings, but it can only be done after passing the experiences of treatments for each case, and allowing the Ministry of Justice to argue with its disintegration and other restrictions. In the court starting on Monday, the government will force Google to sell the Chrome web browser, share search data with competitors, maintain the new AI investment government, and end the exclusion deals with the browser and phone makers.

In this and the trial of upcoming advertising technology treatments, rulers may find that less extremist measures can address the damage they believe that Google has caused. But it is still the biggest threat to combat monopoly faced by a major technology company in the United States decades ago – since Microsoft’s historical loss on the computer operating system 25 years ago.

Outside the United States, Google incurred fines for competitive anti -fees and had to make commercial changes to comply with international regulations. But none of these dealt with what the Ministry of Justice required. If the Ministry of Justice reaches its way, Google and Apple may end one of the most profitable partnerships in the silicon Valley, while competitors such as Microsoft can access some of the most valuable Google data.

During the first phase of the anti -monopoly experiments in the United States, known as the stage of responsibility, Google was challenged to say that they are fairly competing to win users with their superior products. At this next stage, Google will face judges who have already decided that this is not the case – Google will have to simply be for the reduction of penalties.

The Ministry of Justice believes that dangerous measures are necessary to intensify Google’s monopoly. Saying that Google’s exclusionary deals with Apple have made it very difficult for quality competitors to penetrate. Chrome has a Google to control one of the main arrival points for search engines. The popularity of Google Search means that users give it large quantities of inquiries that the competitors do not have.

The Ministry of Justice also wants to ensure that any treatments imposed by the court are resistant to the future so that Google is not able to restore the monopolistic force later. For this reason, it includes focusing on artificial intelligence, which worries it may become a major search platform. The government has retracted its request from Google to sell its investments in artificial intelligence after President Donald Trump took office, but it still wants to demand the company to notify the government of future investments in space.

The court will hear from Google CEOs participating in the searches, Android, and Chrome, as well as executives from online search competitors such as Duckduckgo, Microsoft’s Bing and Yahoo. AI’s executive officials will weigh from companies such as Openai and Perplexity as well. Witnesses witnessed the last time about whether Google has taken anti -competition movements in a specific market; This time the government will use it to roam the importance of the proposed reforms – while Google will argue that they can break the tools of consumers.

The Virginia -based Judge Lioni between Monde, the trial dates for treatments in the advertising technology case, did not specify. But in the coming months, both sides will offer their wishes to change how the company works.

These treatments are likely to be more clear than those in the search tray. Brinkma agreed with the arguments of the Ministry of Justice, which Google monopolizes the markets through two illegal associated services: the publisher ads server known as DFP and AdX ads. (She agreed with Google to statistically-that it had no monopoly in the market for its tools by the advertiser.) The government can reasonably seek to divide Google or both.

This may seem less dramatic than the crosses of the chrome. But the ads market dominates large parts of the Internet economy – where publishers can earn money outside large social networks. Throughout the experiment, these publishers have witnessed that they were bothering Google’s whims. Making this ecological system more competitive can refresh the open network.

By the end of the summer, Mihata can control research treatments. BRINKAMA – which is called the court called “Dockket Docket” for its relatively rapid speed – can define a trial and issue a ruling this year. But Google can pay any concrete changes for years. The company pledged to resume decisions, a road that can take it along the way to the Supreme Court. The Ministry of Justice can also decide from Trump to settle both cases, although several states are also linked to lawsuits, they can follow the same treatments.
The famous anti -monopoly loss of the famous Microsoft, did not break up. When the George W. Bush administration took the case in 2001, it settled on the most moderate treatments. However, experts say the scene has opened for new and innovative companies. One of those who are said to be one of the largest beneficiaries? Google.