A federal judge has ruled that Google has an illegal monopoly in the US. “The market reality is that Google is the only real choice” as the default search engine, Judge Amit Mehta said in his decision, and he determined it had gotten that way unfairly. It’s a ruling that could portend big changes for the company, but we yet don’t know how big, and we might not for years.

Mehta declared on Monday that Google was liable for violating antitrust laws, vindicating the Department of Justice and a coalition of states that sued the tech giant in 2020. The next step — deciding on remedies for its illegal conduct — begins next month. Both parties must submit a proposed schedule for remedy proceedings by September 4th and then appear at a status conference on September 6th.

  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    3 months ago

    What happens now is that Google appeals and then the case will bounce around different courts for years to come, and maybe one day the supreme court will hear it assuming that US lasts that long as a country.

    • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yip. I took the government what, 17 years…? from suing to breaking up AT+T, and they were the largest company in America that entire time.

      At+t tried to slap em with some exorbitant long distance charges and Uncle Sam got tired of the fuck around.

      To today; Google’s been showing the wrong people the wrong kind of ads. Showing representatives ads for laundromats and daycares that offer drivinga ed after looking up how to launder money and traffic children. NO google, I did NOT mean THAT

  • TheYang@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    3 months ago

    this could be bad for mozilla / firefox.

    if Google can’t continue to try to increase / sustain their market share, they may stop paying mozilla to be thw default.

      • MimicJar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        On what grounds would that trial exist?

        They’re the only rendering engine? Oh because they stopped paying Mozilla? Due to a court order?

        It’s a complicated situation.

        • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Because with the Chromium engine becoming the only engine, they can decide which features they want to support and which they don’t, thus, combined with their ad business, they will have no opposition to Manifest v3 and can even do Manifest v3.1 or Manifest v4 which leaves adblockers completely powerless against Google Ads.

          And can essentially deprecate all browser addons forever.

          • MimicJar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            Right but you said “hopefully” and “can”.

            They haven’t actually done that yet.

            I do think the Manifest v2 situation is interesting, but keep in mind the Chromium/Blink engine is fully open source.

            It’s a trickier sell to say they have complete control when anyone is free to fork it.

            • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              Ain’t nobody forking Chromium, and realistically speaking, everyone will just follow whatever standards Google pushes via the Blink engine. It’s the truth, no matter the copium. Maybe Vivaldi and Brave will try to oppose any bad changes, but they will kneel eventually.

    • atro_city@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 months ago

      Mozilla already started sending your data to advertisers by default in firefox 128. If Google’s money dries up, I can’t even begin to imagine what fucked up shit they’ll do.

    • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      If Mozilla needs Google to survive, they can go down with the ship for all I care. Mozilla are bad actors anyways.

        • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          There’s a decent selection at the moment:

          If you need javascript+css: qtwebkit, gtkwebkit, qtwebengine ( blink based :( ), Ladybird (I really don’t care if the dev sucks; goolag/mozilla’s browser monopoly is too important for me to care about some stupid idpol takes)

          If you don’t need javascript but want css: netsurf (there is technically javascript support, but it’s worked absolutely nowhere in my experience)

          If you’re an epic hackor that doesn’t need either: w3m, links2, links, lynx

          I mostly use w3m, but I use qutebrowser (qtwebkit and qtwebengine) when I need js. I’ll probably replace qutebrowser with Ladybird once there’s a port for OpenBSD (trying to write my own at the moment).

          If you just want to abandon www all together, check out gemini and gopher clients.

          • myself@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Least quixotic lemmy user

            Also

            Mozilla are bad actors anyway

            Ladybird (I really don’t care if the dev sucks)

            ???

            • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Least quixotic lemmy user

              Thank you for teaching me a new word. I would hardly call using webkit instead of gecko idealistic, but normies gonna normie, I guess.

              ???

              If you don’t know how to differentiate between a dev having stupid idpol takes and an ad-company feigning to be a privacy organization mass-distributing spyware and adware inside privacy conscious communities then I can’t help you.

            • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              I’m going to conclude you’re lying and haven’t actually used a webkit browser, because in terms of feature parity with blink and gecko, webkit is pretty good. Maybe some stuff breaks with RTC WASM and other questionable browser capabilities, but for 99% of the web they’re fine. All of the browsers I’ve recommended are regularly updated (except links, superceded by links2), all of them are “modern”. If I wanted to recommend old dead browsers, I would recommend retawq, dillo, elinks or xombrero. Even textmode only browsers are very usable for documentation and reading news and blogs.

      • atro_city@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        3 months ago

        That’s not the point. The point is Google is paying Mozilla to be the default. Google pays them 500M per year to be the default. If at some point Google legally isn’t allowed to do so, Mozilla can say bye bye to 500M/year.

    • jsomae@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      The most effective thing to do as consumers is to encourage other people not to use google products. The best way to do that is to foment outrage at Google.

    • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s hard to avoid google products when like 85% of sites have google’s tracjers embedded in them and advertising being their main business.

  • jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Does anyone have a (link to a) good summary of the ruling and rationale?

    I find the idea that “Google is the only real choice” kind of odd. There are other perfectly functional and user-friendly search engines. It’s not like other monopolies, say, Youtube, where there’s no realistic alternative. (I’m not denying that search is a monopoly too.)

    • Mikelius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 months ago

      Practices like getting Reddit to only work with Google instead of Bing are probably a big part of it.

    • averyminya@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Google pays a lot to stay the default browser.

      The other search engines mostly use overlapping indexes.

      Said search engines are also not anywhere near competition to Google.

      Quite frankly, I can only think of 4. DDG, Ecosia, Bing, and Kagi.

      Most people don’t know about Ecosia or Kagi. Most people hardly even know about DDG.

      I wouldn’t consider YouTube as much of a monopoly because despite it being mostly the only one, from what I understand they haven’t paid out to stay the only one, and don’t really leverage market dominance against others (they probably do but I just don’t hear about it often.) The main reason alternatives don’t exist is simply because of the mass amount of data the YT needs

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        YouTube has a network effect monopoly as well. Who would use a competing service?