When considering the approach to address Google’s dominance, Kamyl Bazbaz, senior vice president of public affairs at DuckDuckGo, suggests some key improvements to the EU’s rules. According to Bazbaz, users should not only be prompted with a choice screen once but periodically. He also believes that users should not have to deal with popups from Google urging them to switch the default to Google. Additionally, Bazbaz emphasizes the importance of providing users with an easy way to set a competing search app as the default app when they first interact with it.
With these enhancements, some users may find themselves more inclined to ditch Google in favor of other search engines. However, others may find the recurring requests to be frustrating. It’s a delicate balance to strike in order to encourage competition while ensuring a positive user experience.
Order a Divestiture
While contract bans and choice screens are examples of conduct remedies, the Justice Department has shown a preference for structural remedies in recent years – essentially breaking off parts of a company. This approach was famously used in the breakup of Bell in the 1980s, leading to the creation of various independent companies. However, the success of such structural remedies can vary, as seen in Microsoft’s antitrust battle in the 1990s.
Regulators often prefer a one-time sale as it simplifies the process and eliminates the need for ongoing monitoring. Structural remedies may be more effective in promoting competition, but the challenge lies in identifying the right parts of a company to separate. This decision is crucial in ensuring that the separation does not inadvertently consolidate dominance in another firm.
Despite doubts from some experts about the effectiveness of a search sell-off in increasing competition, there are differing views on the potential outcomes. Financial analysts who study Google parent Alphabet remain skeptical, citing the company’s scale, execution, and financial strength as mitigating factors against significant legal risks and business implications.
Force Google to Share
Mehta’s judgment highlighted Google’s superior search experience, driven by the vast amount of data it processes. Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a law professor at Vanderbilt University, suggests a more aggressive remedy: requiring Google to share its data or algorithms with competitors. This approach aims to level the playing field by providing rivals with the resources needed to improve and compete effectively.