The Google Monopoly Ruling: Implications and Possibilities

On August 5th, Judge Amit Mehta issued a ruling in United States of America v. Google, stating, “...the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly. It has violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act.” Following this landmark decision, lawyers from both Google and the Department of Justice have been debating the implications of the verdict and the potential measures to address the company and its products.

Two months after the ruling, Department of Justice lawyers have drafted an initial proposal outlining potential measures to curb Google’s dominance, including the possibility of breaking up the company. Among the leading candidates for spin-offs are two of Google’s most influential assets: Android and Chrome.

Let’s explore why this decision matters and how Google amassed such power in the first place.

---

How Did Google Become So Powerful?

We live in the era of data, where the more data an organization possesses, the greater its power. Chrome and Android may be free for users, but in reality, users pay Google with their data.

On top of that, Google also invests billions to gain more access to data. For example, in 2023, Google paid $20 billion to Apple to secure its position as the default search engine on Safari. That amount alone accounted for 33% of Google’s total profits. While advertising revenue from these users is substantial, the real value lies in the data Google collects, allowing them to fine-tune predictions about user behavior.

---

Why is Google's Data so Valuable?

The magic lies in Google’s ability to connect search data with other online behaviors. Search data reveals intent—what’s on someone’s mind at a particular moment. When Google can link this intent to subsequent actions, like browsing or purchases, it becomes incredibly powerful in predicting future behavior.

While other companies—like Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp—also collect user data, Google’s predictions tend to be more accurate. Here’s why:

• Others predict behavior based on actions (engagement).

• Google predicts behavior based on intent (search queries).

  
  

Let’s consider a simple scenario:

• A user searches for a product online.

• They browse relevant websites.

• They engage with related content on social media.

  
  

In this case, Google has visibility into the first two actions (search and browsing), while Meta can only see the engagement on social media. Predicting the next step is easier when you know what someone is searching for—their intent—rather than just their past actions.

---

Google's Edge in Cross-Platform User Tracking

Another major advantage Google has is its ability to identify users across platforms—thanks largely to Gmail.

• Most users log into multiple platforms using their Gmail accounts.

• All Android devices require a Google account, which syncs across apps.

• Many people also use Chrome with the same Gmail on both desktop and mobile.

This seamless data stitching allows Google to follow a user’s journey across platforms, capturing what happens before, during, and after a purchase decision.

---

What Happens if Google is Broken Up?

If Google is split into separate companies, this data stitching would no longer be possible. Each new entity—whether it’s Android, Chrome, or Google Search—would have to operate independently, limiting their ability to combine data sources.

Without this unified view:

• Prediction accuracy would decline.

• Ad campaign efficiency would decrease.

• As a result, Google’s advertising revenue would take a significant hit.

  
  

Breaking Google apart might mark the beginning of the end of its dominance.

---

Something to think about..