Equity Are Google's monopoly cases 5 years too late or 2 years too early?
Aug 28, 2024
Neil Chilson, a lawyer and computer scientist who heads AI Policy at the Abundance Institute, dives deep into Google's recent antitrust challenges. He discusses the implications of a court ruling that could disrupt Google's search monopoly and the upcoming advertising tech trial. Chilson also explores how these legal battles might lead to changes in tech business practices. Additionally, he raises the intriguing idea that we may be on the cusp of too early or too late responses to antitrust laws in the rapidly evolving AI landscape.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Two Antitrust Cases Against Google
- The first Google antitrust case focuses on Google’s alleged illegal maintenance of its online search monopoly.
- The second case accuses Google of monopolizing advertising technology, forcing businesses to use its products.
Defining the Relevant Market
- A key argument in the ad tech case revolves around defining the relevant market.
- The DOJ argues for a narrow market of specific ad tech tools, while Google claims a broader market including TV, Facebook, and direct publisher deals.
Contrasting the Two Cases
- The search case focuses on Google maintaining its monopoly through exclusive contracts, like with Apple.
- The ad tech case alleges Google gained its monopoly via acquisitions and other conduct, potentially justifying unwinding past deals.