January 22, 2022

News

News Network

Justice Department Sues Monopolist Google For Violating Antitrust Laws

13 min read
<div>Today, the Department of Justice — along with eleven state Attorneys General — filed a civil antitrust lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to stop Google from unlawfully maintaining monopolies through anticompetitive and exclusionary practices in the search and search advertising markets and to remedy the competitive harms. The participating state Attorneys General offices represent Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Texas.</div>

Department Files Complaint Against Google to Restore Competition in Search and Search Advertising Markets

Today, the Department of Justice — along with eleven state Attorneys General — filed a civil antitrust lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to stop Google from unlawfully maintaining monopolies through anticompetitive and exclusionary practices in the search and search advertising markets and to remedy the competitive harms. The participating state Attorneys General offices represent Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Texas.

“Today, millions of Americans rely on the Internet and online platforms for their daily lives.  Competition in this industry is vitally important, which is why today’s challenge against Google — the gatekeeper of the Internet — for violating antitrust laws is a monumental case both for the Department of Justice and for the American people,” said Attorney General William Barr. “Since my confirmation, I have prioritized the Department’s review of online market-leading platforms to ensure that our technology industries remain competitive.  This lawsuit strikes at the heart of Google’s grip over the internet for millions of American consumers, advertisers, small businesses and entrepreneurs beholden to an unlawful monopolist.”

 “As with its historic antitrust actions against AT&T in 1974 and Microsoft in 1998, the Department is again enforcing the Sherman Act to restore the role of competition and open the door to the next wave of innovation—this time in vital digital markets,” said Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen.

As one of the wealthiest companies on the planet with a market value of $1 trillion, Google is the monopoly gatekeeper to the internet for billions of users and countless advertisers worldwide. For years, Google has accounted for almost 90 percent of all search queries in the United States and has used anticompetitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in search and search advertising.  

As alleged in the Complaint, Google has entered into a series of exclusionary agreements that collectively lock up the primary avenues through which users access search engines, and thus the internet, by requiring that Google be set as the preset default general search engine on billions of mobile devices and computers worldwide and, in many cases, prohibiting preinstallation of a competitor. In particular, the Complaint alleges that Google has unlawfully maintained monopolies in search and search advertising by:

  • Entering into exclusivity agreements that forbid preinstallation of any competing search service.
  • Entering into tying and other arrangements that force preinstallation of its search applications in prime locations on mobile devices and make them undeletable, regardless of consumer preference.
  • Entering into long-term agreements with Apple that require Google to be the default – and de facto exclusive – general search engine on Apple’s popular Safari browser and other Apple search tools.
  • Generally using monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for its search engine on devices, web browsers, and other search access points, creating a continuous and self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization.

These and other anticompetitive practices harm competition and consumers, reducing the ability of innovative new companies to develop, compete, and discipline Google’s behavior. 

The antitrust laws protect our free market economy and forbid monopolists from engaging in anticompetitive practices. They also empower the Department of Justice to bring cases like this one to remedy violations and restore competition, as it has done for over a century in notable cases involving monopolists over other critical industries undergirding the American economy like Standard Oil and the AT&T telephone monopoly. Decades ago the Department’s case against Microsoft recognized that the antitrust laws forbid anticompetitive agreements by high-technology monopolists to require preinstalled default status, to shut off distribution channels to rivals, and to make software undeletable. The Complaint alleges that Google is using similar agreements itself to maintain and extend its own dominance. 

The Complaint alleges that Google’s anticompetitive practices have had harmful effects on competition and consumers. Google has foreclosed any meaningful search competitor from gaining vital distribution and scale, eliminating competition for a majority of search queries in the United States. By restricting competition in search, Google’s conduct has harmed consumers by reducing the quality of search (including on dimensions such as privacy, data protection, and use of consumer data), lessening choice in search, and impeding innovation. By suppressing competition in advertising, Google has the power to charge advertisers more than it could in a competitive market and to reduce the quality of the services it provides them. Through filing the lawsuit, the Department seeks to stop Google’s anticompetitive conduct and restore competition for American consumers, advertisers, and all companies now reliant on the internet economy.

Google is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, and is headquartered in Mountain View, California. Google is owned by Alphabet Inc., a publicly traded company incorporated and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware and headquartered in Mountain View, California.

News Network

  • Texas man admits to smuggling $1.1 Million of crystal meth
    In Justice News
    A 20-year-old Dallas [Read More…]
  • Secretary Blinken’s Call with Sweden’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Linde 
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Office of the [Read More…]
  • Former Bureau of Prisons Corrections Officer Sentenced for Sexually Assaulting Two Women on Multiple Occasions and Lying to Investigators
    In Crime News
    Adrian L. Stargell, 39, a former Bureau of Prisons (BOP) Corrections Officer who worked as an Education Specialist at the FCI-Aliceville facility in Aliceville, Alabama, was sentenced today in federal court in Tuscaloosa, Alabama to 42 months in prison and three years supervised release.
    [Read More…]
  • Secretary Antony J. Blinken and Israeli Alternate Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Yair Lapid Before Their Meeting
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Pennsylvania Marketer Pleads Guilty to Filing False Tax Returns
    In Crime News
    A Bryn Mawr resident pleaded guilty today to filing false tax returns, announced Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney William M. McSwain for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
    [Read More…]
  • Louisiana Construction Company Employee Pleads Guilty to Tax Conspiracy
    In Crime News
    A Louisiana man pleaded guilty today to conspiracy to defraud the IRS.
    [Read More…]
  • Firefighting Foam Chemicals: DOD Is Investigating PFAS and Responding to Contamination, but Should Report More Cost Information
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found The Department of Defense (DOD) is early in the environmental restoration process at or near the 687 installations with a known or suspected release of certain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—heat-resistant chemicals found in certain firefighting foams that can contaminate drinking water (see fig.). DOD Installations in the Environmental Restoration Process with a Known or Suspected PFAS Release, as of Fiscal Year 2020 aAccording to DOD officials, in fiscal year 2021 the Air Force changed its definition for when this phase is considered complete, resulting in a lower number of DOD installations (129 installations) that had completed this phase as of March 2021. DOD has taken actions (e.g., providing bottled water, installing water treatment systems) to address PFAS in drinking water at or near its installations when PFAS amounts exceeded federal health advisory levels. DOD generally has not taken actions to address PFAS in drinking water where PFAS amounts were below the federal advisory levels, but above state PFAS standards. DOD estimates that its future PFAS investigation and cleanup costs will total more than $2.1 billion beginning in fiscal year 2021, which is in addition to $1.1 billion in actual PFAS costs incurred through fiscal year 2020. These costs will likely increase significantly, because DOD is still in the early phases of its PFAS investigation. DOD officials also cited regulatory uncertainty at the federal and state levels as a significant challenge in estimating PFAS environmental restoration costs. However, DOD has not reported future PFAS cost estimates, or the scope and limitations of those estimates, in its annual environmental reports to Congress. By reporting this information to Congress, DOD would ensure that Congress has increased visibility into the significant costs and efforts associated with PFAS investigation and cleanup at or near military installations. As of March 2021, DOD had identified six potential PFAS-free foam candidates; however, PFAS-free foams have been unable to fully meet DOD's current performance requirements. By law, DOD must ensure that a PFAS-free firefighting alternative is available for use at its installations by October 2023. DOD is funding research to address challenges associated with identifying PFAS-free alternatives. DOD plans to continue using PFAS-containing foam aboard ships at sea—as allowed for by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020—until a PFAS-free alternative can meet existing requirements. Why GAO Did This Study DOD has long used PFAS-containing firefighting foam to extinguish fires quickly and keep them from reigniting. PFAS can migrate into the environment (e.g., drinking water) and may have adverse effects on human health. The federal government has issued two nonenforceable advisories but has not yet regulated PFAS in drinking water; some states have adopted PFAS regulations. Conference Report 116-333, accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, included a provision for GAO to review DOD's response to PFAS contamination. This report (1) describes DOD's progress in the investigation and cleanup of PFAS at its installations, and DOD's actions to address PFAS in drinking water; (2) describes DOD's actual and estimated costs for PFAS investigation and cleanup, and evaluates the extent to which DOD has reported those figures to Congress; and (3) describes DOD's progress in identifying PFAS-free firefighting alternatives. GAO analyzed DOD data on PFAS cleanup, costs (actual and estimated obligations), and foam alternatives; evaluated DOD's PFAS cost reporting against policy; and interviewed officials from DOD and selected installations and state environmental agencies.
    [Read More…]
  • Federal Rulemaking: Selected Agencies Should Fully Describe Public Comment Data and Their Limitations
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found Regulations.gov and selected agency-specific comment websites collect some identity information, such as email address, from commenters who choose to provide it during the public comment process. Based on GAO's survey, the extent to which commenters with email addresses confirmed that they submitted their comments to rulemakings varied across 10 selected agencies (see figure). Specifically, estimates of commenters with email addresses that confirmed their comments ranged from 48 to 87 percent. Conversely, estimates of presumed commenters with email addresses that did not make the comments ranged from 5 to 30 percent, calling into question the actual source of these comments. Most comments at eight selected agencies did not contain email addresses. Although agencies may collect identity information, the law does not require its collection or verification. Agencies must consider the substance of the comment, rather than the identity of the commenter, as part of the rulemaking process. Extent of Commenters with Email Addresses that Confirmed They Submitted Their Comments on 10 Selected Agencies' Rulemaking Proceedings Note: Estimates in this figure have a margin of error of +/- 9 percentage points or fewer, at the 95 percent confidence level. Circles representing each agency's estimates may overlap if the estimates are similar. For example, the circle at the 85 percent level for Yes responses covers two agencies. Various aspects of the commenting process can create limitations for certain external users of public comment data. For example, identity information associated with public comments is self-reported and may not always be accurate. Additionally, some agencies do not post all instances of duplicate comments (identical or near-identical comment text but varied identity information), so the public may not have access to all comment data related to a proposed rule. Almost all of the selected agencies share at least some public comment data online, but they do not always fully describe the available data. Specifically, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not define the data elements that may be present in its comment data. Further, FCC, the General Services Administration (GSA) (which manages Regulations.gov), and the eight selected agencies that use that site do not describe limitations to external users of comment data that may affect their use of the data. Key practices for transparently reporting open government data state that agencies should fully describe the information they share, including any limitations. Providing information about available public comment data and their limitations can help external users make informed decisions about their use of the data and help ensure they do not inadvertently draw inaccurate conclusions from the data. Why GAO Did This Study Federal agencies publish thousands of proposed rules each year and are generally required to provide interested persons (commenters) an opportunity to comment on them. Although the identity information collected varies, agencies are generally required to make public comments available online, to the extent practical. Some rulemakings have received extremely large numbers of comments in recent years, raising questions about the accuracy of the associated identity information. GAO was asked to review issues related to identity information associated with public comments. Among other things, this report examines the extent to which commenters confirmed that they submitted comments on rulemaking proceedings for selected agencies and the challenges that exist for external users in reviewing and analyzing public comment data. GAO selected 10 agencies and obtained electronic comments on their rulemakings that accepted comments from 2013 through 2017. GAO selected generalizable samples of comments with email addresses and surveyed commenters to determine whether they submitted the comments. GAO reviewed comment data and key practices for reporting government data.
    [Read More…]
  • Department Press Briefing – February 24, 2021
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Ned Price, Department [Read More…]
  • Justice Department Obtains Settlement from Kentucky Landlord and Rental Manager to Resolve Claims of Sexual Harassment Against Female Tenants
    In Crime News
    The Justice Department today announced it has reached an agreement with defendants Gus and Penny Crank to resolve a Fair Housing Act lawsuit alleging that Gus Crank sexually harassed female tenants while managing a Dayton, Kentucky, rental property owned by his wife, Penny Crank.  
    [Read More…]
  • Another extradition lands third ELN member on U.S. soil for international cocaine distribution
    In Justice News
    Another alleged [Read More…]
  • New Jersey Man Sentenced to Prison for Tax Fraud Conspiracy
    In Crime News
    A New Jersey man was sentenced to 78 months in prison today for conspiring to defraud the United States, filing false claims, and obstructing the internal revenue laws, announced Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Stuart M. Goldberg of the Justice Department’s Tax Division.
    [Read More…]
  • Federal Rulemaking: Deregulatory Executive Orders Did Not Substantially Change Selected Agencies’ Processes or Procedures
    In U.S GAO News
    What GAO Found GAO found that the five selected agencies—the Departments of Commerce, Homeland Security (DHS), the Interior, and Transportation (DOT), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—implemented deregulatory executive order (EO) requirements, most with limited changes to their existing regulatory processes and procedures. Generally, these EOs required agencies to reduce the total number of regulations and overall regulatory costs. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) reported that collectively the federal government met the two primary goals of the EOs by (1) implementing two deregulatory actions for every new regulatory action, and (2) achieving net cost savings (see table). Four of the five selected agencies reported having regulatory cost savings. DHS received a regulatory budget allowance from OIRA for this requirement due to DHS's need to implement priority immigration regulations. However, GAO's analysis of OIRA's data showed the reporting of agencies' deregulatory actions could be overstated partly because OIRA's overall reporting compared all agency deregulatory actions to only significant regulatory actions. A significant regulatory action is one that results in a $100 million or greater effect on the economy in any given year, or meets certain other criteria. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs' (OIRA) Reported Actions, Projected Costs, and Projected Cost-Savings by Selected Agencies, Fiscal Years 2017-2020 Dollars are net present value in millions Selected agencies Non-significant deregulatory actions Significant deregulatory actions Significant regulatory actions Projected Costs and (cost savings) Commerce 65 4 4 ($1,144) Homeland Security 26 8 8 $37,153 Interior 41 10 0 ($6,254) Transportation 47 16 6 ($100,484) Environmental Protection Agency 47 22 14 ($89,196) Selected agencies' total 226 60 32 ($159,925) Source: GAO analysis of OIRA and reginfo.gov data. | GAO-21-104305 Note: OIRA allocated an increase in DHS's regulatory budget to implement priority immigration regulations. The Office of Management and Budget's guidance implementing EO 13771 allowed agencies to include alternative actions as a means of achieving deregulatory goals. Alternative actions are those that were not promulgated through the notice-and-comment rulemaking process, such as guidance documents, information collection requests, and other directives. GAO found that of the 286 deregulatory actions reported by the five selected agencies, at least 28 (or about 10 percent) were alternative actions. GAO also found that the five selected agencies did not identify or implement changes to their regulatory enforcement activities in response to EO 13771. For example, officials from some agencies told GAO that any changes in regulatory enforcement activities that occurred while the EO was in effect were not in response to, nor a consequence of, the EO. Why GAO Did This Study From January 2017, until they were revoked in 2021, three EOs required agencies to reduce the total number of federal regulations and regulatory costs and burden. (1) EO 13771 required agencies to eliminate two deregulatory actions for every new regulatory action; (2) EO 13777 established regulatory reform task forces within the agencies, and (3) EO 13924 directed agencies to identify regulatory actions that may inhibit economic recovery in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. GAO was asked to review these deregulatory EOs to better understand the processes and procedures agencies used to implement them. This report examines (1) selected agencies' processes and procedures to implement the EOs and achieve and report on their goals; (2) their alternatives to rulemaking used in response to the EOs; and (3) how enforcement activities changed in response to EO 13771. GAO selected five agencies that collectively implemented more than half of all actions under the deregulatory EOs—Commerce, DHS, Interior, DOT, and EPA—and reviewed their regulatory policies and procedures, and interviewed relevant agency officials. GAO reviewed OIRA's reports and interviewed agency officials. GAO also identified 20 nonfederal entities and interviewed a nongeneralizable selection of representatives from six that reflected a mix of industry groups, environmental policy advocates, and trade organizations. For more information, contact Yvonne D. Jones at (202) 512-6806 or jonesy@gao.gov.
    [Read More…]
  • Over 300 People Facing Federal Charges For Crimes Committed During Nationwide Demonstrations
    In Crime News
    The Department of Justice announced today that more than 300 individuals in 29 states and Washington, D.C., have been charged for crimes committed adjacent to or under the guise of peaceful demonstrations since the end of May.
    [Read More…]
  • DRL FY19 Supporting Transitional Justice in Burma
    In Human Health, Resources and Services
    Bureau of Democracy, [Read More…]
  • GAO Strategic Plan: Serving the Congress and the Nation 2010-2015 (Supersedes GAO-07-1SP)
    In U.S GAO News
    This document supersedes GAO-07-1SP, GAO Strategic Plan, 2007-2012, March 2007. This document presents GAO's strategic plan for serving the Congress for fiscal years 2010 through 2015. In keeping with our commitment to update our plan every 3 years, it describes our proposed goals and strategies for supporting the Congress and the nation as the United States undergoes a period of change, daunting challenges, and promising opportunities. We have identified eight trends that provide context for our plan: (1) evolving security threats; (2) urgent fiscal sustainability and debt challenges; (3) economic recovery and restored job growth; (4) changing dynamics of global interdependence and shifts in power; (5) advances in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics; (6) increasing impact of networks and virtualization; (7) shifting roles in government and governance; and (8) demographic and societal changes confronting the young and old. Since we issued our last plan, significant changes have affected our nation's commitments and fiscal outlook. Our nation has multiple wartime-related commitments as it winds down one war in Iraq, increases its presence in another in Afghanistan, and re-examines commitments in Pakistan. The global financial crisis emerged as a new national security threat as it destabilized economies around the world. Our nation faced the deepest recession since the Great Depression, with unemployment exceeding 9 percent and economists forecasting that recovery could be both slow and fragile.
    [Read More…]
  • Justice Department Warns Taxpayers to Avoid Fraudulent Tax Preparers
    In Crime News
    With less than one month left in this year’s tax season, the Department of Justice urges taxpayers to choose their return preparers wisely. Return preparer fraud is one of the IRS’ Dirty Dozen Tax Scams. Unscrupulous preparers who include errors or false information on a customer’s return could leave a taxpayer open to liability for unpaid taxes, penalties, and interest.
    [Read More…]
  • New Bankruptcy Filings Plummet 38.1 Percent
    In U.S Courts
    Bankruptcy filings dropped 38.1 percent for the 12-month period ending March 31, 2021, a dramatic fall that coincided with the coronavirus (COVID-19), which first disrupted the economy in March 2020. 
    [Read More…]
  • On the Australian Sanctions Regime
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
  • Secretary Antony J. Blinken With Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday
    In Crime Control and Security News
    Antony J. Blinken, [Read More…]
Network News © 2005 Area.Control.Network™ All rights reserved.