The U.S. Department of Justice is ramping up its case against Google’s alleged monopoly, suggesting the government could eventually force the company to sell its widely-used Chrome browser. The move is part of the DoJ’s push to challenge Google’s hold over the digital advertising and search engine markets.

The Justice Department’s latest legal action accuses Google of engaging in anticompetitive behavior by unfairly using its dominance in search and advertising to prop up its other services, most notably Chrome. The government argues that Google’s browser and vast data ecosystem have given the company an outsized advantage over competitors, stifling innovation and harming consumers. By bundling Chrome with its Android operating system, Google has built an extensive network that could limit consumer choice and make it difficult for smaller firms to compete.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    19 days ago

    Justice Department is 100% lobbing this over to JD Vance’s buddy Peter Thiel who’s going to enshittify it even further and turn it with its massive install base into a tool for techno-fascism.

    • biofaust@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      I must say that, as a European using a Firefox fork for my daily browsing while waiting for Ladybird, I don’t see that outcome as completely negative: Google, somehow, in America has kept a completely unjustified good vibes feeling surrounding itself, while Thiel is much more evil in the public eye.

      If Chrome is associated with him in anyway it can become a more lucid image of itself.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        18 days ago

        I really don’t think this is true. It might push some politically engaged users to Firefox, but unlike Musk, most people don’t know who Thiel is, and as long as he keeps it that way, nobody will care.

        • biofaust@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          18 days ago

          That’s when we come onto the scene.

          I am continuously “translating” news and opinions from here on LinkedIn. Already got banned from a professional Slack that contains most people in my industry for saying in a private conversation that I like watermelon.

          Not gonna stop. People are not politically inclined because we kept our knowledge to ourselves for too long.

  • fuzzywombat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    Which tech company would buy Chrome from Google? I just can’t think of a single tech company that could be an improvement over Google owning Chrome.

    • Amazon

    • Apple

    • Meta

    • Microsoft

    • Oracle

    What about media companies? I don’t see consumers benefiting from this.

    • Comcast

    • Disney

    • Netflix

    • Viacom

    What about telecom? I still don’t see consumers benefiting from this.

    • AT&T

    • T-Mobile

    • Verizon

    What about foreign companies? Will they be even allowed to buy Chrome? I’m not sure.

    • LG

    • Philips

    • Samsung

    • Sony

    The more I think about it, this won’t end well.

    • jackyard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 days ago

      Chromium is already there and companies like Microsoft have their own forks so… Yeah I think there’s no point of buying Chrome.

      • Rob T Firefly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        17 days ago

        It’s the most popular web browser in the world. Direct access to the browser windows and browsing data of the majority of Internet users would be the point.

  • InFerNo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    18 days ago

    Microsoft Chrome

    Meta Chrome

    Amazon Chrome

    Apple Chrome

    Sell to who though

  • barkingspiders@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    19 days ago

    I think this is good news which seems hard to believe right now. I’m sure someone will find a way to make this terrible but on it’s face we are watching an important anti-trust ruling take place. Google’s monopoly on the browser is dangerous and unhealthy. Taking it away from them is absolutely the right thing to do. Who inherits the power over the single browser used by most of the world remains to be seen though.

  • ikidd@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    17 days ago

    I’d cheer if I thought this was anything except a blackmail play when a Trump administration is now involved. They’ll buy him off and it’ll all be back to status quo by fall.

  • Singletona082@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    19 days ago

    Thus the price of collaboration. You are not rewarded, you simply draw attention to yourself as someone with wealth they can pillage.

  • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    19 days ago

    I don’t really get what selling Chrome and Android would accomplish. I’m all for breaking up tech monopolies but both of those projects are mostly open source that get proprietary Google crap and (for Android, at least, some monopolistic behavior like requiring what’s preinstalled, which is fine to ban).

    I don’t work on ad-supported projects so I may be out of my element but it seems like what would actually help end the monopolistic behavior is requiring Google (and Facebook) to spin off their ad network businesses. The monopoly problem isn’t Chromium or AOSP or that Google runs ad-supported search. It’s that if [insert random site] wants ads, they typically use AdSense. If Facebook and Google want to run ad-supported services, fine. But they shouldn’t also also be the middlemen for advertisers who want to run ads on third party sites. That’s a recipe for monopolistic behavior.

    In my ideal world, there would be no targeted ads at all and advertisers had to sponsor — and were so partly responsible for — the specific content they want to be associated with. But that probably isn’t going to happen since every politician is an advertiser that wants to launder their sponsorships through a middleman.

    • reddig33@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      19 days ago

      Spinning them off into their own independent companies would make more sense than a sale to another party.

  • flop_leash_973@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    It would be better to not allow Google to have a major stake in the control of the Chromium project itself. Same for Android, force them to spin AOSP off into a nonprofit or sell it to EFF or something and forbid them from having a huge stake in it.

    Let them use it for their own products, but remove their financial influence over the underlying software.

  • WormFood@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    the browser itself doesn’t matter. Google have had 10 years to do what they want with the specs for html, CSS and JavaScript, to define everything from browser extension APIs to the http protocol itself. they have won. not only have they spent a decade architecting the web in a way that mostly benefits them, they have made those specifications so bloated and complicated that nobody can develop a competitor from scratch. it took years to undo the damage wrought by ie6’s stagnation but this is different. this shit can’t be undone. it’s fucked forever