The Google technology giant has just undergone another legal blow in the United States, losing a historic antitrust case. This results from the loss of the company in a similar case last year.
The Meta social media giant is also currently involved in a historic legal battle in the United States which could change not only its functioning, but also how millions of people in the world communicate.
Hearings in the Meta affair started earlier this week in a Washington DC court, after the meta-PDG Mark Zuckerberg did not settle the case for US $ 450 million. Presented by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) American, the allege pursuit that Meta has broken antitrust laws and has illegally obtained a monopoly on social media platforms.
With Google and Meta, Amazon and Apple are also faced with significant antitrust challenges in the United States.
All these actions continue despite major changes both in the FTC and the United States Ministry of Justice due to the election of Donald Trump.
Collectively, these cases represent a substantial regulatory thrust to examine and potentially slow down the market power of large technologies. So what are all these cases exactly? What are the next steps for each of them? And what can they mean for consumers?
Cases against Google
The Google affair has just lost was linked to online advertising.
The United States Ministry of Justice said that Google had behaved in an anti -concurative manner to monopolize the complex market for digital advertising technologies. This market facilitates the purchase and sale of online ads.
The American district judge, Leonie Brinkema, agreed that Google has a monopoly on the tools used by online publishers to host the advertising space, and the software that facilitates transactions between online publishers and advertisers.
In her decision, judge Brinkema said Google had “voluntarily engaged in a series of anti -competitive acts” which finally led him to obtain “monopoly power on the advertising servers of the open display publisher”.
Google said it would appeal the decision. The Ministry of Justice will ask the court to force Google to deactivate certain parts of its advertising technology activities when the appeal phase of this trial begins later this month.
The second case involving Google is linked to internet research.
The Ministry of Justice argued that Google used exclusion agreements, such as the payment of Apple billions per year to be the default search engine on iPhones, to lock the competitors.
In August 2024, a federal judge ruled that Google acted illegally to maintain its research monopoly.
The case has now passed in the remedy phase. A Crucial Remedies trial is expected to start next week. During this, the court will hear the arguments on the measures that should be taken against Google. The potential remedies could be significant, regulators previously suggesting measures such as restrictions on the Android operating system of Google or even forcing the sale of its Chrome browser.
Google also declared its intention to appeal this decision.
The case against Meta
The case of the FTC against Meta alleys that the technology giant illegally maintained a monopoly on the market for “personal social networking”.
The heart of the FTC argument is that Meta used a “buy or bury” strategy to eliminate competitive threats.
This would have involved the acquisition of emerging rivals, notably Instagram in 2012 and WhatsApp in 2014, in particular to neutralize them before being able to challenge the domination of Facebook.
The FTC indicates internal communications as proof of an anti -competitive intention. These include Mark Zuckerberg’s declaration, “it is better to buy than to compete”. They also include an internal note that has shown that Zuckerberg has planned to run Instagram in 2018 for concerns about antitrust control.
The Commission maintains that Meta’s actions have stifled innovation and injured consumers by limiting the choices. He seeks to force Meta to decide or sell, Instagram and WhatsApp.
Meta vigorously defends her actions. He argues that he does not hold a monopoly, faced with a fierce competition of platforms such as Tiktok, Youtube and X (formerly Twitter).
The company maintains that the acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp were pro-competitive, allowing Meta to invest billions to improve and evolve applications, ultimately benefiting users. A key defense is that the FTC itself examined and approved the two agreements over ten years ago.
The trial should last eight weeks.
Will Oliver / EPA
Cases against Apple and Amazon
In March 2024, the Ministry of Justice, as well as several states, continued Apple, alleging that it illegally retained a monopoly on the smartphone market.
The trial claims that Apple uses its control over the iPhone ecosystem to stifle competition and innovation by degrading messaging quality between iphones and Android devices and the limitation of the functionality of digital wallets and third -party watches.
Apple filed a request for rejection of the case in August 2024. The dispute was in its early days and should continue for several years.
In September 2023, the FTC, joined by many states, also continued Amazon.
The trial alleges that the technology giant illegally maintains monopoly power in the “online superstores” market (where consumers buy) and “online market services” (for third -party sellers).
The FTC affirms that Amazon uses intertwined anti -competitive tactics. These include punishing sellers for having offered lower prices elsewhere, forcing sellers to use its services, degrade search results with excessive announcements and invoice exorbitant seller costs.
At the end of 2024, the judge president largely refused Amazon’s attempt to reject requests for federal demands, allowing the case to continue.
A test is currently scheduled for October 2026.
Somodevilla / Pool / EPA chip
Major structural changes could come
Together, these proceedings represent the most important antitrust application against large technological companies in the United States for decades. They point out a fundamental review of the way in which competition laws apply to digital platforms and rapidly evolving ecosystems.
The results could potentially lead to major structural changes. These changes could include the forced rupture of companies such as META or important behavioral remedies restricting the operation of these companies.
Whatever the specific results, the decisions in these cases will probably establish crucial legal precedents. In turn, they will deeply shape the future competitive landscape for technology. They will also probably influence regulations on a global scale and have an impact on innovation and investment in the digital economy.
What cases do not reflect is the change in independence of regulatory organizations in the United States, where consistency with White House policy is now essential. The results will surely test the relationship between Trump and the “Tech Bros” which, literally, were literally by his side recently.
