Google's search engine deal with Apple a centerpiece of DOJ lawsuit

AppleInsider

Google's deal with Apple to maintain its standing as the default search engine for iOS devices is reportedly at the heart of a recent Justice Department lawsuit against the tech giant.

Credit: Solen Feyissa

On Tuesday, the Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google that accused the company of abusing its power over the internet search industry. The deal with Apple and other companies is cited as part of the department's argument.

Within Google, the prospect of losing the default position was thought to be so dire that it was internally dubbed "Code Red," according to a new report from The Wall Street Journal.

Google search is the default search engine in Safari and for Siri on iPhone and iPad devices. According to the Journal, that has been a major source of revenue for both companies. In 2018, for example, Google is said to have paid Apple upwards of $9 billion to maintain the arrangement.

Although neither company has confirmed how much the deal is actually worth, the lawsuit indicates that it accounts for between 15% and 20% of Apple's annual profits. That suggests payments of as much as $11 billion.

Furthermore, the prominence of the deal between the two tech giants in the Justice Department's lawsuit likely indicates that it will intercede in the relationship.

In 2018, the department says, Apple CEO Tim Cook and Alphabet/Google CEO Sundar Pichai met to discuss how both companies could work together to drive search revenue growth. After the meeting, a senior Apple executive told a Google counterpart that "our vision is that we work as if we are one company," the lawsuit claims.

Google, for its part, signaled that it could challenge the litigation. In a response on Tuesday, the search giant called the lawsuit "deeply flawed" and claimed that users choose -- and are not forced -- to use Google search.

The Mountain View-based company has come under antitrust scrutiny in the U.S. and elsewhere. Earlier in October, the House Judiciary Committee wrapped up a yearlong investigation that found Google and other tech giants enjoy monopoly power over their respective domains.

Gaby

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

ramanpfaff

I think it’s so tough to decide this sort of thing. As the prior post said, everyone has options. Years ago when you wanted gas in your car there was only one company that supplied gas, so anti-trust laws were developed. The current situation is sooo different. Times are changing, clearly the laws need to change before cases like this go through. IMO 

ihatescreennames

Gaby said:

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

Has Google said that? This article doesn’t mention it. Google is right, though, that if someone wants to change the default search engine it’s possible, and it’s simple.

In regard to your sisters, I imagine if one of them said, “I don’t like using Google all the time. I sure wish there was a way to change it.” and you said, “You can in Settings” they would likely be able to figure it out in minutes.

Gaby

ihatescreennames said:

Gaby said:

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of by their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

Has Google said that? This article doesn’t mention it. Google is right, though, that if someone wants to change the default search engine it’s possible, and it’s simple.

In regard to your sisters, I imagine if one of them said, “I don’t like using Google all the time. I sure wish there was a way to change it.” and you said, “You can in Settings” they would likely be able to figure it out in minutes.

They most certainly did. Otherwise I would not have said so. They made a statement....

sree

Gaby said:

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

Your argument makes no sense. Cars come loaded with a music system, and you can change it whenever you want. But most people don't, so is that monopoly?
In software terms, all apple products come pre-installed with some software like photos and music, does that mean it is a monopoly. 

If the user has an easy way to change the default search engine and the other search engine will function just as smoothly and efficiently as google, then it can't be considered as a monopolistic practice. It is just a standard business agreement.

The problem with IE and Netscape was that IE had access to underlying windows routines (which netscape didn't) which made IE a much faster experience than Netscape. If the google search default doesn't get any kind of preference over another search engine then this case has no meat in it. It is just a witchhunt to make some bribe money probably.

avon b7

There is little doubt that Google has a de facto monopoly in search. IMO it is also the best search engine by far for general Internet use.

Obviously, few competitors can even get a toe in the door if you need billions of dollars in cash to become the default option on a platform like iOS. 

But, albeit linked to search indirectly, there are a swathe of other issues that help feed the monopolistic side of things. 

Chrome is another example. Any bookmarks you set are incrusted with Google AMP data, making your bookmarked link a Google link. Chrome seems to make you jump through a hoop to see the non AMP version of a site and I only know of one page that has a button (front and centre) to load the non AMP version of its site. 

Logging out of an individual Google account seems to be impossible now unless it is via a computer. A computer also seems to be necessary for exporting bookmarks.

Adding a device to Google Home became a game of cat and mouse unless you had a Google Assistant device.

These types of moves are not exclusive to Google though and on the other hand the user reaps some rewards in the form of GMS as a whole, but GMS itself is an issue and, ironically, the US government has brought that into focus with the Huawei situation. It is actively using the monopolistic side to Google to its own advantage. 

Never before has the Gatekeeper role been so clear from various companies and when you read comments like the one suggested in the article (about two companies acting as one) you begin to see how this situation shouldn't exist. Competition will suffer. 

However, proving that those comments were even made may be a challenge. 

I have few issues with Google from a consumer viewpoint but I can see why things really need to be looked at and sorted out (and not only with Google in mind). 

saarek

I'm not sure what Google is so afraid of. They make the best search engine out there, period. No other competitor is close and the cost it would take to bring a competing service up to scratch is just so much that no company even attempts it. The only company I can think of that could possibly see the investment as worthwhile would be Apple as they could sell it as a privacy feature with their devices.

If DuckDuckGo was a genuinely viable alternative I'd switch in an instant for the sake of privacy, but it's not.

Nope, Google should simply reverse some of their more egregious practices and let the case fall away without a fight.

mjtomlin

Yeah I don't get it. I don't like Google, but no one is being "forced" here. Google isn't forcing users or even Apple to use their search. It's just the opposite, Google is paying Apple to make it the default, but users can change it whenever they want - it's the first thing I do. Maybe Apple needs to add "Choose your search engine:" when you first start Safari and leave Google as the default, but get paid less for it. Let's face it... most people are going to choose Google anyway, so I don't see the problem with Apple making money from it.

Any scrutiny regarding Google search should be more about search results and how Google might actually abuse its monopoly position, like say, promoting their own services and sites over competitors'. Or even gouging companies for online advertising - another monopoly they have.

gatorguy

Gaby said:

ihatescreennames said:

Gaby said:

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of by their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

Has Google said that? This article doesn’t mention it. Google is right, though, that if someone wants to change the default search engine it’s possible, and it’s simple.

In regard to your sisters, I imagine if one of them said, “I don’t like using Google all the time. I sure wish there was a way to change it.” and you said, “You can in Settings” they would likely be able to figure it out in minutes.

They most certainly did. Otherwise I would not have said so. They made a statement....

I thought it was Apple offering search providers the default search position based on a combination of search quality, user-friendliness, and how much they were willing to pay but with Yahoo, Bing also paying for placement.  Others like DDG are still accepted as long as they meet Appel's requirements. Are you saying Apple is only interested in the money, whoever pays the most gets the default position and users be damned? 

Google's statement was "Apple features Google Search in its Safari browser because they say Google is “the best.” This arrangement is not exclusive—our competitors Bing and Yahoo! pay to prominently feature, and other rival services also appear."

 Did Tim Cook lie when he said the number one reason Google was the default is "I think their search engine is the best."? If he did not then where are you seeing a disconnect? Is it because Apple wants to be paid for it? Sorry but that's on Apple, who to be fair would be dumb not to insist on sharing the monetary benefits. It's their platform to monetize.

blastdoor

Some of the anti-trust arguments bandied about regarding Apple make little sense to me. But this argument does. Between them, Apple and Google have a smartphone duopoly. If they "act as if they are one company" with respect to search on smartphones, then they have a monopoly in search on smartphones. I can't speak to the law, but in terms of the economics, this is clearly an anti-trust issue. 

pujones1

Gaby said:

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

I agree with you here. I personally think that Google has the best search engine hands down. Even though I don’t like all the tracking the product is superior.

On a different note pre-installed software is great. When you buy a product you don’t want to have to download a lot of stuff just to get it started right? That would be a detractor and poor product. Anyone remember when you had to get assistance from from the clerk at the carrier to setup your new phone? Yikes! I want my things to work out of the box. I’m sure most people just want it to work out of the box. Most people aren’t tech types. That’s why the non-pro models do so well in sales. I wouldn’t buy anything less than pro though. Most won’t care if Google is installed or not. I think just having the option (which is already built into the software) to change should be enough. Apple should be allowed to capitalize on that opportunity. It’s smart business. That’s good for the customer. 

saarek

pujones1 said:

Gaby said:

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

I agree with you here. I personally think that Google has the best search engine hands down. Even though I don’t like all the tracking the product is superior.

On a different note pre-installed software is great. When you buy a product you don’t want to have to download a lot of stuff just to get it started right? That would be a detractor and poor product. Anyone remember when you had to get assistance from from the clerk at the carrier to setup your new phone? Yikes! I want my things to work out of the box. I’m sure most people just want it to work out of the box. Most people aren’t tech types. That’s why the non-pro models do so well in sales. I wouldn’t buy anything less than pro though. Most won’t care if Google is installed or not. I think just having the option (which is already built into the software) to change should be enough. Apple should be allowed to capitalize on that opportunity. It’s smart business. That’s good for the customer. 

You know I felt the same way when I bought my XS Max, I wanted the “Pro” model and figured it’d be way better than the cheaper model.

Then my wife gets an XR and I’m sat there looking at the two, trying out the camera, speed, etc, and I just felt like a mug. Still do feel that way, the XR is just so nice. I’ll not make that mistake again.

Concerned_Citizen

I agree that Google needs to be reined in. Ever since Eric Schmidt started being involved at Google, it has focused on monetizing everything it can and this is when it became a corporate pariah. I also take offence at Apple wrapping itself in the flag of virtue with privacy protection for its users all the while dodging taxes all over the world, using the exact same tactics as all other tax dodging multinationals the world over. Protecting our privacy is certainly a good thing for Apple but it also needs to stop playing dumb and start paying its fair share of taxes. This whole BS that companies can shift their profits to tax heavens by artificially locating their IP or management services in these jurisdictions is totally reprehensible and must end immediately. Profits for all corporations need to be taxed where their sales are made, on a prorate basis. For example, if a corporation makes $100 Billion in sales per year, $50 Billion of those sales in the US, and a $40 Billion annual profit, it should pay taxes in the US based on 50% of their overall profits ($50 Billions in sales in the US/$100 Billions in total sales = 50%. 50% x $40 Billions in profits = $20 Billions in taxable income in the US). It's very simple and this is the way the IMF should mandate corporate taxation to work all over the world. Period. I don't understand why this should even be a discussion...

tmay

gatorguy said:

Gaby said:

ihatescreennames said:

Gaby said:

Ok but one can’t have it both ways. They cannot argue that users specifically choose to use google search because of its superiority, but then also pay Apple a vast fortune to set it as default. And by the same token if it is indeed so easy for users to change to the search of by their preference (which on a technical level it is) and again, if it’s the search engine of choice why are they preinstalling it everywhere they can and why is it so important to have it be the default app to begin with. The fact is that most people will simply use whatever comes preinstalled. Few will take time to download and try different engines to see which is the best for them or to compare as they are in many respects lazy like that and people over 35 are less savvy to these things anyway. My sisters are 28 and I don’t think any of them are very familiar with iOS settings or know they can change default browser or search and the same for many of my friends of similar or even younger ages. So I think they’re being quite disingenuous in their arguments. 

Has Google said that? This article doesn’t mention it. Google is right, though, that if someone wants to change the default search engine it’s possible, and it’s simple.

In regard to your sisters, I imagine if one of them said, “I don’t like using Google all the time. I sure wish there was a way to change it.” and you said, “You can in Settings” they would likely be able to figure it out in minutes.

They most certainly did. Otherwise I would not have said so. They made a statement....

I thought it was Apple offering search providers the default search position based on a combination of search quality, user-friendliness, and how much they were willing to pay but with Yahoo, Bing also paying for placement.  Others like DDG are still accepted as long as they meet Appel's requirements. Are you saying Apple is only interested in the money, whoever pays the most gets the default position and users be damned? 

Google's statement was "Apple features Google Search in its Safari browser because they say Google is “the best.” This arrangement is not exclusive—our competitors Bing and Yahoo! pay to prominently feature, and other rival services also appear."

 Did Tim Cook lie when he said the number one reason Google was the default is "I think their search engine is the best."? If he did not then where are you seeing a disconnect? Is it because Apple wants to be paid for it? Sorry but that's on Apple, who to be fair would be dumb not to insist on sharing the monetary benefits. It's their platform to monetize.

Tim did not lie about that, for the record.

Turns out that I use Google Sheets (customer decided that), YouTube (with ads), and Search, that I am aware of anyway. I never really liked the other search engines, but I haven't used any of those in the last year, so maybe they have improved.

avon b7

Just to clarify one part of what I wrote about AMP and bookmarks above.

Chrome bookmarks the Google link to the page if you reached it via Search. To avoid that, you have to reload the web page from the info bar and then bookmark it. 

If anyone knows how to directly bookmark a page you visited as a result of a Google search without the link being a Google link, please let me know. 

Concerned_Citizen

inTIMidator said:

It is not Apple's or any corporation's fault for following the tax laws. Don't bitch at Apple, bitch at the politicians who make those loopholes.

Apple has resisted monetizing its users' information when most other corporations have no inhibition whatsoever in doing it. Wy can't Apple do the right thing too concerning paying its fair share of taxes? Your's is the kind of reasoning that led the world to the lowest common dominators... "I cheat because everybody cheats and I can get away with it"... This is called "gaming the system" and it is exactly what is destroying our planet and brought the world close to the abyss... 

corp1

It is interesting that it's such a large part of Apple's bottom line, and the "work as if we are one company" part is pretty interesting (remember how Apple and Google got in trouble for their non-poaching pact under Steve Jobs?)

Be that as it may, I've had no trouble using non-Google search engines (Bing and DuckDuckGo) under iOS.

corp1

avon b7 said:

Just to clarify one part of what I wrote about AMP and bookmarks above.

Chrome bookmarks the Google link to the page if you reached it via Search. To avoid that, you have to reload the web page from the info bar and then bookmark it. 

If anyone knows how to directly bookmark a page you visited as a result of a Google search without the link being a Google link, please let me know. 

That's very annoying. I like the idea of links being links to the actual site rather than redirect links through a search engine.

nicholfd

Concerned_Citizen said:

inTIMidator said:

It is not Apple's or any corporation's fault for following the tax laws. Don't bitch at Apple, bitch at the politicians who make those loopholes.

Apple has resisted monetizing its users' information when most other corporations have no inhibition whatsoever in doing it. Wy can't Apple do the right thing too concerning paying its fair share of taxes? Your's is the kind of reasoning that led the world to the lowest common dominators... "I cheat because everybody cheats and I can get away with it"... This is called "gaming the system" and it is exactly what is destroying our planet and brought the world close to the abyss... 

Only two posts, both off-topic, and dogging on Apple.  Why are you here?

It's not cheating or gaming the system, if you follow all the rules!. Apple does.  Get the rules changed if you don't like the outcome.