ProMarket - It’s Time To Imagine Chrome Without Google
Senior reporter Karina Montoya reflects on the end of the remedies phase of the Department of Justice’s case against Google for monopolizing the online search market. She argues that Google’s warnings against divestiture of its browser, Chrome, fall short and that a breakup will benefit the security of the internet, innovation, and users.
The remedies phase for the Department of Justice’s antitrust case against Google’s online search monopoly wrapped up on May 30. Last fall, Judge Amit Mehta agreed with the DOJ that Google had monopolized the online search market through anticompetitive practices. Now, his ruling on remedies is expected by August. If he once again sides with the government, the ruling may order a divestiture of Chrome, the world’s most popular browser with more than four billion monthly active users.
Chrome was not at the center of Google’s anticompetitive practices, which namely included payments to Apple and Mozilla to set Google Search as the default search engine on their web browsers, as well as requiring phone manufacturers who use Google’s Android operating system to preinstall Google Search as the default. However, the DOJ argues that a divestiture of Chrome will separate Google’s search engine and browsers and help revamp competition in the online search market.
As expected, Google fiercely opposes this breakup scenario and warned that it would produce all sorts of terrible things, from a loss of user privacy and cybersecurity breaches to damaging the user experience on other Google products.
As we inch closer to a resolution of this case, it’s worth reviewing how the remedies phase has underscored the need to spin off Chrome.
Why the focus on Chrome?
Google has argued that Chrome’s role in its search monopoly is irrelevant. The government’s case focused heavily on Google’s exclusive deals with Apple for distribution of Google Search, as well as tying agreements with phone manufacturers who use Android. However, last year’s trial featured plenty of discussion on how browsers are critical distribution points for search engines. The discussions revealed how Chrome emerged as an essential fulcrum to Google’s search monopoly, both as a barrier to entry in internet search and a source of data scale.
Google did not just require Android phone manufacturers to default to Google Search. It required that their phones preload Chrome as well and prevent users from uninstalling it. At the same time, users can easily delete other browsers.
Android’s market share of smartphone software in the U.S. is 40 percent. Google’s $18 billion annual contracts with Apple set Google Search as the default option on just short of the remaining 60 percent of smartphone software used in the U.S. Behavioral economics research shows that default status is incredibly difficult for competitors to overcome. Google also pays Firefox’s Mozilla for default placement, with payment amounts that have increased over time despite Mozilla’s small browser market share: one percent on mobile and seven percent on desktop. Through these contracts, Google has locked down how users search the internet. These contracts underscore how essential it is for Google to control the browser market if it is to dominate the internet search market.
Read full article here.