Pointed out that the judge in charge of the Justice Department vs. Google lawsuit did not even know ``whether Firefox is a web browser or a search engine''

The issue in the trial between Google and the US Department of Justice, which has been held in the Washington Federal District Court since September 13, 2023, is ``whether Google illegally monopolizes the search engine market.'' Judges hearing such cases are required to have appropriate knowledge, but the judge in this case between Google and the US Department of Justice lacked knowledge of the web browser

Mozilla Firefox . has been pointed out.

Judge in US v. Google trial didn't know if Firefox is a browser or search engine | Ars Technica

In 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and a group of state attorneys general

sued Google for ``antitrust violations in the search engine market.'' 'Google enters into agreements with companies such as Apple and Samsung to make it their default search engine, and these practices illegally maintain a monopoly and create unfair barriers to entry for competitors,' the DOJ said. ``I am doing it.''

A trial on this case has been scheduled for September 12, 2023 in the District Court of the District of Columbia before Judge Amit Mehta.

Trial begins over whether Google violates antitrust laws in the search engine market - GIGAZINE

In the lawsuit, DOJ's Kenneth Dinzer said, ``Since 2007, when Google achieved the world's top market share, Google has 'weaponized' its influence as the default search engine on various mobile devices, and has dominated the search and advertising markets. 'They are illegally maintaining monopoly power.' Dinzer also said, ``Google is blocking the entry of competitors and hindering its potential to make web search 'faster, easier, and better for consumers.'

The DOJ invited former Google Chief Economist Hal Varian to testify. We also invited Sridhar Ramaswamy, co-founder of search engine Neeva , to testify about the barriers to entry that Google poses to competing search providers.

Additionally, attorney William Cavanaugh claims that Google is intentionally delaying the implementation of Bing ads in Search Ads 360 , despite a deal with Microsoft to place Bing ads in Search Ads 360. .

On the other hand, Google's lawyer, John Schmidtline, argues that ``Google has not entered into an advertising contract with Microsoft, and therefore has no obligation to advertise.''

In this case involving Google and the DOJ, knowledge of how search engines have developed and the search engine system is required in order to make an appropriate judgment. However, according to Ars Technica, a foreign media outlet, Mehta struggled to understand Search Ads 360, and it was also reported that he did not understand whether Mozilla Firefox was a web browser or a search engine. I am.

Mr. Schmidlein also stated, ``In recent years, users have become increasingly dependent on SNS such as TikTok to search for information.'' 'I am facing this,' he claims. Furthermore, ``Google has become the default search engine in web browsers provided by Mozilla, Apple, etc. not because Google has monopoly power in the relevant market, but because of the high quality of the Google search engine.'' says.

Schmidlein said, ``The reason Microsoft and other search engines have not been able to secure top market share in their field is not because Google has default search engine agreements with Apple and Mozilla; 'Because we provide it,' he criticized.

In addition, Mr. Schmidlein pointed out to the DOJ, ``This lawsuit seeks to distort competition in the search engine market by hindering Google and its search capabilities.''

in Web Service, Posted by log1r_ut