Google search works great for consumers. A judge’s monopoly ruling could ruin that | Opinion

The recent ruling by a federal district judge to apply the “illegal monopoly” label to Google’s search engine is bureaucratic and judicial overreach that establishes a dangerous precedent for free enterprise and innovation across all sectors of the economy. It will also harm Google’s consumers and partners.

It isn’t our government’s role to dictate consumer choices or pick winners and losers, particularly when allegations of wrongdoing stem from business competitors rather than individuals. As the case enters the remedies phase, the Department of Justice may soon move to dismantle and break up a company for the first time since AT&T in the 1980s — an extreme posture, even for the Biden-Harris administration and Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan.

Competition policy works best when it prioritizes consumers and innovation, not when it demonizes the size of companies for its own sake. Judge Amit Mehta’s decision in U.S. et al. v. Google veers into the outdated belief that “big is inherently bad,” a mindset that U.S. jurisprudence moved away from decades ago.

Although Mehta found that Google “has long been the best search engine” and that “competitive firms have not succeeded because of their inferior quality,” he nevertheless concluded that the company engaged in anti-competitive behavior merely because of successful outcomes. He did not explicitly point to illegal and exclusionary conduct.

This heavy-handed approach has proved detrimental for consumers in the past, and it only amounts to a political win for an activist federal government and for Google competitors that simply haven’t kept pace in the marketplace.

Put simply, the opinion ignores the nascent disruption and innovation of generative AI to search and consumer choice online. From education and finance, to healthcare and e-commerce, these new technologies are driving new elements of competition and innovation, benefiting consumers.

The reality is that the landscape for search is more competitive than ever; people can solicit recommendations on Reddit, find new music on Spotify, ask ChatGPT to summarize a lengthy document or shop on the seemingly never-ending e-commerce sites around the web.

By fixating on the size of companies, we risk reverting to a flawed public policy that is underpinned by attempts at political popularity rather than strict adherence to the heightened requirements of American antitrust regulation.

Consider for a moment Europe’s recent embrace of the big-is-bad online mentality. In the mere three months that the bloc’s Digital Markets Act, or DMA, has been in effect, the regulatory snarl has drastically reduced innovation and early-stage tech investment. The DMA is laser-focused on regulating U.S. tech companies, driving companies such as Apple, Alphabet, and Meta to pull back on launching new products because of the punitive measures that come with being especially good at what they do.

And it’s not just the innovators that are hamstrung. Consumers abroad are also bearing the burden over the European Union’s fight against big tech. The very features and services that once made their lives easier, more connected, and more efficient are now being stunted by Eurocrats. Sites and apps that once helped people find what they needed quickly and easily are now bogged down by restrictions that do nothing but frustrate users.

Online companies in Europe are no longer thinking about how to push the envelope or deliver the next big idea — they’re too busy trying to avoid stepping on regulatory landmines. This is what happens when government overreach takes precedence over consumer choice and market-driven progress.

In this political season, both major parties should think twice before following Europe’s lead of encouraging executive agencies to pick winners and losers in an effort to secure new constituent support. If we continue to go down the road of punishing successful companies in industries ranging from transportation to energy and making threats to break them apart, there is no doubt that the U.S. will fall behind in the global innovation race and cede even more technological ground to our adversaries.

This story was originally published September 25, 2024 at 3:31 AM with the headline "Google search works great for consumers. A judge’s monopoly ruling could ruin that | Opinion."