Politics

The DOJ went narrow on Google. That may be good news for the rest of Big Tech.

The antitrust complaint focuses on facts specific to the search giant. But there are warning signs for Facebook, Amazon and Apple, too.

The DOJ went narrow on Google. That may be good news for the rest of Big Tech.

Despite all the bluster, the DOJ's legal argument is narrow and fact-based, focused not on Google's size but primarily on the contracts it has with other companies.

Photo: Alex Tai/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

In the opening paragraphs of Tuesday's antitrust complaint, the Justice Department suggests that the problem with Google is … pretty much everything. The "scrappy startup" has become not just "a monopoly gatekeeper for the internet," but an "empire" that's too big, too rich and too much in control of everything related to search.

But that's not what the DOJ is suing over. Despite all the bluster — "Google is so dominant that 'Google' is not only a noun to identify the company and the Google search engine but also a verb that means to search the internet" — the DOJ's legal argument is narrow and fact-based, focused not on Google's size but primarily on the contracts it has with other companies.

That should be a relief to the other big tech companies. Instead of making legal arguments that could apply with equal force to any of them, the DOJ's case takes aim at a set of facts that are unique to Google.

"It's factual and narrow, and that may limit its scope," said Gary Reback, a veteran Silicon Valley lawyer who has been credited with getting the government to bring a case against Microsoft in the 1990s.

Before the Google case landed, industry watchers had speculated that the case would include some discussion of self-preferencing, or the allegation that Google prioritizes its own products in search results. But the DOJ didn't go there, instead homing in on Google's agreements that require mobile phone manufacturers like Apple to keep Google as their default search engine.

A discussion of "self-preferencing" might have left Amazon vulnerable, as critics have long accused Amazon of prioritizing its own private-label products. And a broader indictment of Google's practice of buying market dominance could also spell trouble for Facebook, which deals with its competitors in a similarly spendy way. Facebook could have come off even worse, given the email evidence that Mark Zuckerberg wanted to buy up competitors to kill competition.

And — big talk at the beginning notwithstanding — the complaint specifically avoids concluding that the sheer size and success of Google is a cause for legal concern. That might be too much for pro-business Republicans to swallow.

The big tech companies are certainly not out of the woods. One worry: the way the DOJ defines the relevant market.

Google has argued that it's got plenty of competition because Expedia offers search results in travel and Amazon offers search results in retail. Similarly, Amazon has argued that it's in competition with every brick-and-mortar store in the world, and Apple has resisted the argument that its App Store is a market unto itself.

With Google, the DOJ has taken a much narrower view of the relevant market, defining it as "general search"; think less Amazon and Expedia, more DuckDuckGo. Similarly narrow definitions could spell trouble for the other big tech firms.

"This confirms what [the tech companies] suspected, which is that government agencies are not going to accept their universe-and-all-it-contains market definitions," said former FTC Chairman William Kovacic.

There's one other big worry for Google's big tech brethren: the line where the DOJ says, "When a consumer uses Google, the consumer provides personal information and attention in exchange for search results. Google then monetizes the consumer's information and attention by selling ads."

For years, some experts have argued that digital platforms can't violate antitrust laws because they offer their services for free. The DOJ has now taken the view that companies like Google and Facebook don't really offer their services for free because they monetize users data with ads.

"This confirms that the government is looking at these issues not in the way the tech companies would like," Kovacic said.

Protocol | Fintech

A lawsuit tests who controls the stock market

Citadel Securities seeks to block IEX's product that limits high-frequency trading advantages.

Kenneth Griffin is the founder and chief executive officer of Citadel LLC, which argued during Monday's hearing that IEX's D-Limit order type shouldn't have been approved by the SEC.

Photo: Patrick T. Fallon/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Market maker Citadel Securities, stock exchange IEX and the Securities and Exchange Commission each gave oral arguments Monday in a legal case that could have large implications for financial markets.

Last October, Citadel Securities sued the SEC, seeking to reverse the SEC's previous decision last August to approve IEX's D-Limit order type, arguing that this order type would hurt the overall market. The case was argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals Monday.

Keep Reading Show less
Tomio Geron

Tomio Geron ( @tomiogeron) is a San Francisco-based reporter covering fintech. He was previously a reporter and editor at The Wall Street Journal, covering venture capital and startups. Before that, he worked as a staff writer at Forbes, covering social media and venture capital, and also edited the Midas List of top tech investors. He has also worked at newspapers covering crime, courts, health and other topics. He can be reached at tgeron@protocol.com or tgeron@protonmail.com.

If you've ever tried to pick up a new fitness routine like running, chances are you may have fallen into the "motivation vs. habit" trap once or twice. You go for a run when the sun is shining, only to quickly fall off the wagon when the weather turns sour.

Similarly, for many businesses, 2020 acted as the storm cloud that disrupted their plans for innovation. With leaders busy grappling with the pandemic, innovation frequently got pushed to the backburner. In fact, according to McKinsey, the majority of organizations shifted their focus mainly to maintaining business continuity throughout the pandemic.

Keep Reading Show less
Gaurav Kataria
Group Product Manager, Trello at Atlassian

Everything you need to know about the Allbirds IPO

Allbirds wants to become an iconic global brand for shoes and everything else.

Photo: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

The humble venture capitalist puts on her Allbirds one shoe at a time, just like everybody else (or at least everyone else in Palo Alto).

Since its founding in 2015, Allbirds has become an essential component of the tech bro uniform, alongside such staples as the embroidered Patagonia quarter-zip, Lululemon ABC pants, the Zuck-inspired black T-shirt and a Y Combinator-branded Hydro Flask.

Keep Reading Show less
Hirsh Chitkara
Hirsh Chitkara (@ChitkaraHirsh) is a researcher at Protocol, based out of New York City. Before joining Protocol, he worked for Business Insider Intelligence, where he wrote about Big Tech, telecoms, workplace privacy, smart cities, and geopolitics. He also worked on the Strategy & Analytics team at the Cleveland Indians.
Protocol | Policy

It’s Frances Haugen’s world. We’re all just living in it.

With the release of the Facebook Papers, Haugen holds Facebook's future in her hands.

Haugen's decision to open the trove of documents up to outlets beyond the Journal has sparked a feeding frenzy.

Photo: Frances Haugen

Facebook knows a thing or two about optimizing content for outrage. As it turns out, so does Frances Haugen.

Or at least, the heavyweight team of media and political operatives helping manage the rollout of her massive trove of internal documents seems to have learned the lesson well. Because the document dump known as the Facebook Papers, published the same day as Facebook's earnings call with investors and the same week as the conference where it plans to lay out its future as a metaverse company, wasn't just designed for mass awareness.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Here are all the Facebook Papers stories

They paint a picture of Facebook that's very different from what Mark Zuckerberg likes to say.

Image: Getty Images, Protocol

Monday morning's news drop was a doozy. There was story after story about the goings-on inside Facebook, thanks to thousands of leaked documents from Frances Haugen, the whistleblower who wants the information within those files to spread far and wide. Haugen is also set to speak in front of the British Parliament on Monday, continuing the story that is becoming known as The Facebook Papers.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

Latest Stories