FTC Says Google Antitrust Ruling Goes Beyond Epic Games, Hints Tech ‘Monopolist’ Should Be Broken Up

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed an amicus brief in the Epic Games antitrust lawsuit against Google’s monopolistic behavior, suggesting that the court impose stringent actions against such practices.

The lawsuit was filed in 2020 by developer Epic Games against Google. Epic claimed that Google violated antitrust regulations by monopolizing two markets: the market for distribution of mobile apps for Android users and the market for processing payments. In addition, Google benefits from gaining access to user data.

“Google has thus installed itself as an unavoidable middleman for app developers who wish to reach Android users and vice versa,” Epic said.

In December 2023, a district court jury in California ruled in favor of Epic, finding that the game developer proved that Google was in violation of antitrust laws. District Judge James Donato has yet to decide on what relief Epic should be provided.

Naveen Athrappully reports for The Epoch Times that on Aug. 12, the FTC filed an amicus brief in the case, suggesting how the court could consider remedies.

Ensuring antitrust laws are strictly enforced “is essential for protecting and preserving economic freedom and the free-enterprise system,” the agency pointed out.

“When a company engages in business practices that are found to violate the antitrust laws, courts are empowered to remedy those violations by ordering all relief necessary to restore competition in the affected markets,” it stated.

This includes “identifying and requiring actions that the defendant must affirmatively take toward that end.”

If companies violating antitrust laws reap the advantages secured through such actions, it will end up incentivizing other firms to engage in similar behavior, the agency warned.

As such, the district court should ensure that the violating firm does not continue securing the benefits obtained via breaching antitrust rules, it stated.

Though it should be said that at no point does the FTC outright say that Google should be broken up, Duncan Riley reports via SiliconAngle.com, that any lay reader with a knowledge of U.S. antitrust law and English can reasonably come to that conclusion. And there’s more.

“Looking forward in cases like Epic v. Google often requires the consideration of network effects, data feedback loops, and other key features of digital markets,” the FTC writes. “This could help ensure that potential competitors can overcome the advantages established digital platforms often gain, which include network effects and data incumbency.”

But the real kicker comes towards the end. “Google’s monopolistic behavior has significantly harmed millions of users in the United States,” the FTC adds. “Allowing monopolists to reap the rewards of illegal monopolization while avoiding the costs of restoring the competition that they unlawfully eliminated would undermine deterrence.”

There is a strong possibility that the FTC is hinting at a possible breakup of Google as a negotiating tactic; nonetheless, it should be taken seriously.

Kent Walker, president of Google global affairs, said the decision “recognizes that Google offers the best search engine“ but concludes that Google ”shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available,” according to a statement emailed to The Epoch Times.

“Given this, and that people are increasingly looking for information in more and more ways, we plan to appeal,” Walker stated.

“As this process continues, we will remain focused on making products that people find helpful and easy to use.”

Earlier this year, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) called for stronger antitrust enforcement to break up big tech firms.

“To restore competition in existing digital markets and to foster emerging markets like AI, Amazon’s e-commerce platform should be separated from its product lines. Google should be broken into its search business and its browsing services,” she said.

“Each of the major cloud services—Google, Microsoft, and Amazon—should not be allowed to use their enormous size to dominate a whole new field, and that means blocking them from operating large language models. Each of these moves would create valuable competition.”

According to Bloomberg, less severe options than a breakup of Google include forcing Google to share more data with competitors and measures to prevent it from gaining an unfair advantage in AI products.

Should a breakup occur, first up would be forcing Google to divest both its Android operating system and its Chrome web browser.