Justice Department takes aim at Google Chrome for potential big-tech breakup
Google could be forced to split its Chrome browser from the core company by the US Department for Justice based on the results of an antitrust probem, as part of lawsuits expected to be launched in the coming weeks.
Google Chrome on a MacBook Pro
Preparation work for the lawsuits could lead to a court-ordered breakup of Google's business, the first in a number of centuries in the United States, with the search giant's main revenue sources being put at risk. As part of the discussions, the Justice Department and state prosecutors currently investigating Google over antitrust issues are considering making Google get rid of both its browser and parts of the advertising business it controls.
Sources with knowledge of talks advised to Politico of the discussions, but no final decisions on what course of action to recommend have been made. Investigators have taken the opportunity to ask the opinions of experts and competitors in the online advertising industry for advice, to work out how to reduce Google's dominant control in the field, with some pointing to the sale of Chrome being a potential outcome.
Part of the criticism for Chrome is due to its dominance in the browser market, making up some 60% of desktop browsers and 37% of mobile browser use in the United States. With such a sizable audience, the impact of initiatives affecting advertising by Google are effectively considered an industry standard.
As Google also operates a major search business, its dominance in both fields led to criticisms that it could use web histories of Chrome users to enhance its advertising business. In July, Google said it would phase out third-party cookie use in Chrome over two years, under the claim it would enhance consumer privacy, though such a move would also affect online advertising in the long run.
While non-Google marketing firms would be heavily impacted by the phasing out of third-party cookies, which are used to track advertising effectiveness, Google's ability to gain similar data from Chrome directly would enable it to continue such tracking, giving it a major advantage.
At the same time, the Department of Justice is also working on an antitrust lawsuit against Google over its control of online search, one which could be filed before the end of the month.
The news of potential legal action against Google arrives a week after the US House of Representatives were said to recommended the break-up of major tech companies like Google, including Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google. Following a series of hearings on antitrust in tech, a report from the House antitrust subcommittee points to companies like Apple and Google having tremendous power in the market, and that changes have to be made.
Apple has had to deal with many antitrust lawsuits in recent years, but it remains to be seen how a recommendation for breakup would affect the company and its various businesses.
Google Chrome on a MacBook Pro
Preparation work for the lawsuits could lead to a court-ordered breakup of Google's business, the first in a number of centuries in the United States, with the search giant's main revenue sources being put at risk. As part of the discussions, the Justice Department and state prosecutors currently investigating Google over antitrust issues are considering making Google get rid of both its browser and parts of the advertising business it controls.
Sources with knowledge of talks advised to Politico of the discussions, but no final decisions on what course of action to recommend have been made. Investigators have taken the opportunity to ask the opinions of experts and competitors in the online advertising industry for advice, to work out how to reduce Google's dominant control in the field, with some pointing to the sale of Chrome being a potential outcome.
Part of the criticism for Chrome is due to its dominance in the browser market, making up some 60% of desktop browsers and 37% of mobile browser use in the United States. With such a sizable audience, the impact of initiatives affecting advertising by Google are effectively considered an industry standard.
As Google also operates a major search business, its dominance in both fields led to criticisms that it could use web histories of Chrome users to enhance its advertising business. In July, Google said it would phase out third-party cookie use in Chrome over two years, under the claim it would enhance consumer privacy, though such a move would also affect online advertising in the long run.
While non-Google marketing firms would be heavily impacted by the phasing out of third-party cookies, which are used to track advertising effectiveness, Google's ability to gain similar data from Chrome directly would enable it to continue such tracking, giving it a major advantage.
At the same time, the Department of Justice is also working on an antitrust lawsuit against Google over its control of online search, one which could be filed before the end of the month.
The news of potential legal action against Google arrives a week after the US House of Representatives were said to recommended the break-up of major tech companies like Google, including Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google. Following a series of hearings on antitrust in tech, a report from the House antitrust subcommittee points to companies like Apple and Google having tremendous power in the market, and that changes have to be made.
Apple has had to deal with many antitrust lawsuits in recent years, but it remains to be seen how a recommendation for breakup would affect the company and its various businesses.
Comments
Unlike Safari and Edge, you actually have to make an effort to install Chrome.
Sorry, I think Chrome is shite, but no one is making me use it, so this is stupid.
They could increase the cost of doing business for a free product. Yeah, yeah, I hear all the yammering from competitors. Virtually all of that is rooted in competing with an existing company, established infrastructure, experienced staff...often, a full treasury. Sucks, doesn't it? Maybe our government bureaucrats can help out? Aside from a level playing field, there needn't be much more. In fact, more would be unfair in most cases.
This brouhaha isn't going to be about the "little guy" getting a fair chance. It's about smallish to mid-level corporations trying to climb up to and over trail-breakers in most cases.
I don't see why they're attacking Chrome, which I never use, instead of simply going after Google's advertisement systems. Break that up and let people decide which browser they want to use. We can't change how Google grabs information but we can change the browser we use.
It may actually hurt things. Google's existence is the very thing that keeps us from having to rely on Microsoft for everything. (This is true even if you use Apple hardware whether you wish to admit it or not.) Also, the war between Google and Amazon forced Google to court retailers - especially WalMart and Best Buy - as alternative channels.
Also, do these folks know that without the Chrome browser, Chrome OS would be absolutely worthless? So give Chrome OS to who then? To Microsoft? Don't make me laugh. To Amazon? Yeah, they did such a good job with smartphones - when they didn't even invest the OS - that we should totally believe that they have the capability to compete with Microsoft and Apple in PCs. Who else is there? Oracle maybe? Again, they did such a good job with the tech that they got from Sun, didn't they? I still remember when their CEO stated that the cloud was going to fail.
Also, getting rid of Chrome wouldn't do squat to solve the real problem - Google's search and ads dominance - in the first place. Apple folks should understand this: why do AirPods and the Apple Watch dominate? Because they are the best, right? Same here. First off, Google was #1 in search before the Chrome browser in the first place. Prior to Chrome, the #1 browser was Firefox, where Google was default. Also, everyone who used IE would make Google the default search engine. Ads? More of the same. Google bought DoubleClick - back when Microsoft, Yahoo or anyone else could have but no one wanted it - combined it with their own tech, came up with some innovative offerings like AdWords and so forth.
Look, if you want to split search off from Google then fine. Liberating Android, ChromeOS, Nest etc. from Google's singular focus on search would make that company better. "Wear OS is crap, our ChromeOS UI is buggy, there are no productivity apps for Android tablets, we go years without updating Android TV or our smart speakers and no one buys our Pixel phones, and were Samsung to ditch us we would be up a creek with no paddle? Ah, big deal, we get hundreds of billions a year off ads so who cares." But splitting Chrome - a free product that is primarily open source - from Google would just inconvenience billions of users while accomplishing nothing at all.
As clearly stated in the article, this potential action is rooted in the fact that Chrome has such a large market share that "initiatives affecting advertising by Google are effectively considered an industry standard."
And just FYI, a monopoly is not per se illegal under antitrust law, and a business can violate antitrust law without being a monopoly. The purpose of antitrust law is prevent unfair competition, and that can occur in a number of ways.
There is also no requirement that someone be "forced" to use something for it to violate antitrust law.
Because Microsoft has a fraction of the browser market share, and an even smaller fraction of web advertising and search market shares. In other words, whatever you find offensive about Microsoft's "tactics" is not an antitrust violation.