Leave or more difficult than it seems? What does Google Monopoly mean?

In the modern Internet era, a few cases of monopoly were closely examined in the Silicon Valley – and outside – like a historical issue of the United States government that defies Google’s hegemony in online search.

Not since the United States against Microsoft, which was presented in 1998, has felt a great technology threatening.

But a year after the ruling that Google was a “monopoly”, Judge Amit Mihata suggested a series of treatments that some see – although not everyone – as it left Google.

Here is what you need to know.

The possibility of the company’s disintegration was great during the treatment phase of the case. In the end, Judge Mihata decided not to force Google to stop Chrome, the most popular browser in the world, as the government lawyers requested.

The US Department of Justice also suggested that the court supervise the company’s Android operating system to ensure the company refrain from using its ecosystem “in favor of public research services and text monopolies of the text.”

Chrome and Android appeared safely in the rule of Judge Mihata.

“[T]John Coca, a professor of economics at North Eston University, said Khartoum was the mechanisms of obtaining a stake, to prevent new competitors, and to determine the monopoly of its research.

Organizers will get another shot to force the separation later this month in the treatment phase of the various anti -monopoly issue that the United States government is rising against Google – to dominate advertising technology.

The Ministry of Justice presented this issue against Google in 2020. At that time, only a few consumers heard, not to mention the AI’s artificial intelligence.

Judge Mihat wrote in his decision, “Jennai has changed the course of this case,” noting how the money has flowed to emerging technology.

The pace of change has only accelerated in the year since it concluded that Google is a monopoly on online search.

Although Google is a major player in artificial intelligence – artificial intelligence responses often publish in the highest search results – Judge Mihata said that companies in this field can put a kind of financial and technological threat against Google that traditional search companies cannot.

Jennifer Hodliston, a great colleague in the technology policy in the conservative thought tank, said that the judge found himself in an uncomfortable place: a request to “predict the future of a fast -changing market instead of just looking at historical facts.”

This is the reason why Judge Mihat may be particularly cautious as he has made possible solutions to monopolize Google’s research.

While most of the Wall Street analysts agreed that Judge Mehta’s rule was a great victory over the technology industry, the judge ordered some treatments that may make a difference, according to some experts.

For example, Google must share specific data with “qualified competitors” as the court considers it.

This will include parts of its search index, the huge Google inventory of the web content that works like an internet map.

The judge will also allow some competitors to display the results of Google Search as an attempt to give them the time and resources they need to innovate.

The judge allows Google to continue to pay companies like Apple and Samsung to distribute the search engine to devices and browsers, but will prevent Google from maintaining exclusive contracts.

Partners will have more influence to save those deals or partnership with alternative companies.

Professor Rebecca Hi Alinsorth, a anti -monopoly expert at Vanderbelt Law College, said that the recruitment of the worst scenario in Google does not make Judge Miha’s rule a “real victory” for the technology industry.

After all, she says, Judge Mihata was obligated to the Microsoft case in which the Court of Appeal struck the judge’s batch to dismantle this monopoly.

“It was always an arduous battle to try to make this judge sit in this court to do the thing that his colleague was refused to do” more than two decades ago.