The US Justice Department and 11 federal states are suing Google for violating the law by using its market power to maintain a monopoly position. Every time you search the web through an iPhone you are in fact directed, via Safari, to Google, at the expense of other search engines. Not by chance. In 2018, Apple's number one, Tim Cook, met with Sundai Pichar, the CEO of Google. At that time, the two giants decided to overcome past quarrels, when Google's Eric Schmidt had challenged Steve Jobs by introducing mobile software in competition with Apple.
He matured like this the deal that is being challenged today by the Justice Department of the United States government which, in a 64-page memorandum, accuses the company founded by Larry Page and Sergej Brin of having secured all the traffic of the Apple in exchange for paying 10 billion dollars a year, a rent which is justified because a third of Google's profits pass through there (and between 15 and 20% of Apple's turnover). “We basically work as if we were one company,” confessed one executive. The same happens with the other giants of the web, enticed by convenient commercial agreements which also serve to guarantee the near-monopoly of Google (88% of the market) to the detriment of Bing, the engine of Microsoft.
Almost twenty years after the mega-trial against Bill Gates' company, antitrust law is back in the limelight. Of course, as analysts noted this morning, Google has an impact force and a technological superiority that protects it from the pitfalls of the competition as confirmed the rise on Wall Street after the announcement of the protests. But the threat to the web giants is still high. If victorious, the antimonopoly offensive would force Google to make structural changes in its behavior. And the former would have big effects on everyone. So far, in fact, the Antitrust action has aimed at protecting the most convenient price for users. For this reason, it is Google's defense, the accusations have no foundation because we offer free services for the benefit of all.
On the contrary, the indictment argues, thanks to the gigantic advertising turnover, Google can erect strong barriers against anyone who dares to compete with her. And it doesn't take much to understand that this translates into a huge advantage over the competition but also on the quality of life of Americans. And what is true for Google, also applies to Amazon, Facebook and so on.
The charges were brought by Attorney General Bill Barr himself, that is one of Donald Trump's most trusted associates, determined to exploit a popular cause against the nouveau riche on the eve of the vote, as well as punishing Silicon Valley which is hostile to him. But, in the midst of the most poisonous electoral campaign, the lawsuit against Google and its partners is supported by practically everyone. A wind is blowing in the USA that recalls the campaigns of the late nineteenth century against the Robben Barons, the unscrupulous superrich who owned the railways. And it is no longer enough to promise, like Google, “don't be evil” to get away with it.
