• mkwt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    But if they’ve only been found to monopolize search, how does that remedy the search monopoly? Presumably the new separate Google Search company would still have a search monopoly.

    • adarza@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      3 months ago

      without search and their abuse of that monopoly, google wouldn’t have dominant positions or massive market shares that many of their other properties (products, services, software, etc) have.

    • LazaroFilm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      3 months ago

      Because that search monopoly allows them to boost their other products above all others. It’s not an impartial search result anymore. There is a financial incentive to favor their own products.

    • redhorsejacket@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      I’m speculating, but perhaps the thought would be that separating Google Search from the rest of the company would deprive them of the alternative revenue streams they used to maintain their market position? If I remember the ruling against them correctly, one of the key pieces of evidence cited by the judge was that Google spent like 30 billion dollars a year to have 3rd parties use their engine by default.

      • mkwt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        But the ads on search are the big revenue driver for Google overall. Presumably those stay with the Google Search subunit, and they would have plenty of cash to do whatever?

    • Fester@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      Google search has some features that alternative search engines don’t. I use DuckDuckGo for 99% of everything, but I occasionally use Google to see local busy hours, or sometimes any hours, reviews, phone numbers without navigating a shitty website, etc.

      I think there are ways to break up Google search on its own, and make some of those features separate and accessible on other search engines.

      Then there’s the matter of advertising, data collection, SEO, exclusivity with corporations like Reddit, etc.

      Google is doing things with its search that seem to intentionally reduce the ability of other search engines to compete with them, and that’s really all that the antitrust laws are meant to prevent.

      • Dran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 months ago

        I think you go about it the other way: break data analytics and advertising off from everything else. If every unit has to be self-sufficient without reliance on data collection and first-party advertising I think you fix most of the major issues.

      • Gsus4@mander.xyzOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        They removed something that I used to use: using “-word” to exclude a keyword. Apparently it is because advertisers don’t want you doing that, so they turned it into a weighting. So there are features and antifeatures too. I’ve seen ddg do that too before, but right now it works :)