In August, a US federal court ruled that Google had a monopoly on Internet search and was defending it against competitors through unfair means.

“This is truly a historic decision,” says Ulrich Müller, founder of the Cologne, Germany-based nonprofit Rebalance Now, which campaigns to limit the power of big business.

The ruling, he told DW, would show that “the broad antitrust tools in the United States are now being used more forcefully, even against domestic technology companies.”

According to a court filing last week (October 7), the US Department of Justice (DoJ) plans to ask a federal judge to break up the big tech company. But that’s just one of several possible options being explored, as the case now enters the so-called remedies phase, meaning there are several options to curb the company’s market dominance.

The breakup of Google, one option among many others

Government lawyers have outlined a series of potential remedies it could pursue, including restrictions on how Google’s artificial intelligence mines other websites to provide search results, and banning Google from paying billions of dollars a year to companies like Apple to ensure that Google is the default search engine presented to consumers on gadgets like iPhones.

Another possibility would be to force Google to open its search engine data to its competitors. However, “structural changes” have also been proposed, which would involve the dissolution of Google’s parent company, Alphabet.

The released document is only a preliminary version of the recommendations the Justice Department is expected to present in November.

Florian Bien, from the University of Würzburg, believes that the planned structural changes could mean “very strict bans, such as banning the pairing of the Android operating system with Google search and the Chrome browser”, which would “look like almost to a dissolution of the company. “, the international business law expert told DW.

Above all, he stressed, a dissolution constitutes a very serious attack on the rights of a company, which is why the courts should provide strong legal protections. “As a result, such proceedings can drag on, sometimes so long that technological developments outpace the courts.”

It could also be that the market solves problems differently. That’s why Bien believes there is little enthusiasm within the U.S. government to engage in such a battle. “It just takes up an incredible amount of resources within the Department of Justice and elsewhere.”

Are American antitrust authorities finally waking up?

In an opening speech In January 2022, Assistant U.S. Attorney General Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division stated that over the past two decades, “we have seen comparable industry evolution, or even greater than the industrial revolution.

This has created “serious competitive challenges,” he added, as concentration has increased in “more than 75 percent of U.S. industries.” And as more markets are dominated by large companies, he added, it has become more difficult for entrepreneurs and small businesses to get started. “That is why we and our law enforcement partners are committed to using all available tools to promote competition,” he added.

The United States has a century-old tradition of antitrust law, dating back to 1911, when the Standard Oil oil monopoly was broken up. According to Ulrich Müller, in the 1960s and early 1970s potential monopolies came under intense scrutiny which began to weaken in the 1980s with the advent of the so-called neoliberal economic theory promoted by the Chicago School of Economics.. According to this theory, high market concentration was acceptable if firms were efficient, which would lead to fewer structural measures being taken.

However, in 1982, the telecommunications giant AT&T was broken up. Two decades later, Microsoft faced a similar threat, after a 2001 court ruling ordered the software giant to be broken up on the grounds that it was a monopoly whose Windows operating system was closely tied to its own browser, Internet Explorer, eliminating competitors like Netscape.

Microsoft appealed and avoided the split but was forced to open parts of its system to competitors.

The EU is also wary of Google

In the European Union, market dominance by Google and other Internet giants is also a focus of antitrust authorities.

In 2017, the European Commission had already imposed billions in fines on Google for promoting its price comparison service.while in 2018, the company was fined more than 4 billion euros ($4.35 billion) for illegal practices related to its mobile operating system, Android. However, the European Court of Justice has yet to rule definitively on this issue.

In 2019, the European Commission imposed a new fine of one billion euros on Google for abusing its dominant position in online advertising.

The EU’s Digital Markets Act, which came into force in March this year, also aims to limit the market power of internet “gatekeepers.” For Google, this means that services like Google Maps can no longer receive preferential treatment in search results.

Müller believes, however, that the EU’s antitrust proceedings against Google have had little impact. “Although billions in fines have been imposed, Google’s monopoly profits are so large that they can easily afford to pay them,” he said.

Google pushes back

In the latest case of Google against the United States, the internet giant is accused of paying billions to smartphone makers like Apple and Samsung to have the Google search engine pre-installed by default on their devices. Google also offers the popular Android operating system for mobile devices.

Google also has a monopoly on online search advertising, holding between 80 and 90 percent of the search engine market share in the United States and Europe. YouTube and Google Maps, both part of the Google empire, also play a central role in online advertising.

“In 2023, we generated more than 75% of our revenue from online advertising,” according to the annual report from Alphabet, Google’s parent company.. Total revenue last year was almost $306 billion (€281 billion).

Google’s business is also driven by its control over the so-called Adtech sector, which manages the infrastructure for online advertising. The company sells advertising space on its own websites and applications and acts as an intermediary between advertisers who wish to place ads online and publishers (i.e. third-party websites and applications) who can offer space advertising.

The European Commission has expressed its concerns, stating that “the only way to resolve competition concerns is to compulsorily divest certain Google services.”

Google has already announced plans to appeal the decision and says it has won over users with its quality and faces significant competition from Amazon and other websites.

Müller says there are currently more than 100 competition cases around the world against Google or its parent company, Alphabet, and they will likely fight these cases to the end. The US lawsuit against Google’s dominance of the online advertising market could, however, create momentum for Google to reach a settlement and agree to certain measures, Müller suggested.

Under the framework presented in October, the Justice Department will submit a more detailed proposal to the court by November 20. Google, a subsidiary of Alphabet, has until December 20 to submit its own appeals. A final decision is not expected before the end of 2025.

This article was originally written in German.