- Australia, Japan, the EU, South Korea, India, and China have also taken action against Google.
- Google may just be the beginning, and Apple, Facebook, and Amazon may also be checked.
- Analysts assume that the crisis would have a larger effect on U.S. inventories if radical action were taken against them.
According to reports, the US Department of Justice filed its long-awaited antitrust lawsuit against Google, and it could take a judge to spin the market-value of the search and advertisement giant worth $1 trillion. The big economies worldwide seem to be starting to take steps against Google, and the United States alone is not the problem.
Incomplete figures indicate that Australia, Japan, the EU, South Korea, India, and China are all embroiled in antitrust suits, or have censored Google in Asia and Europe.
So, why did Google cause outrage to the public? Indeed, Google may just be the beginning, and Apple, Facebook, and Amazon may also be checked.
Analysts assume that the crisis would have a larger effect on U.S. inventories if radical action were taken against Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google. Reuters abruptly announced on 20 October that a case against Google could be brought by the United States Department of Justice. Indeed, similar news began as early as last year.
Google announced on 7 September last year that the US Department of Justice had ordered the organization to include appropriate archives of past antitrust inquiries, representing the first admission of the antitrust survey by a technology giant publicly by a US regulator.
Some days before the public inquiry was accepted by Google, the US attorneys general announced that a new antitrust inquiry against Google is being launched.
Meanwhile, Australia sued Google in July of this year on the basis of manipulating users to gain approval to use their personal details for tailored advertisements. The antitrust regulator cautioned that Google’s $2.1 billion deal to buy Fitbit exercise tracker would provide disproportionate consumer details that could hurt health and competitiveness in the online industry.
It also needs to know how much Google is paying for media organizations to re-publish their material through neutral mediators. Google answered, claiming its principal search engine in Australia may therefore be challenged. For the following three years, Google revealed a decision to pay Australian dollars to publishers around the world.
Simultaneously, Reuters quoted reports that China is about to begin an antitrust probe into claims that Google has used its Smartphone OS to hamper competition.
According to reports, the complaint was forwarded to the Chinese Top Business Regulator’s State Council Antitrust Board for investigation. After 2010, China has blocked Google’s primary search site. However, there are still several enterprises in China, including advertisement sales.
Google’s inquiry has never ceased in Europe. The EU has been at the center of antitrust proceedings against Google since the first inquiry was conducted in 2010. In 2017, Google faced immense penalties from the European Union.
Though Google said it will spend heavily in India, it has never got an understanding of India. Reuters estimates that Google faces a reportedly exploited role of its Android operating system in the smart TV industry in India. This case reflects Google’s fourth big obstacle in India.
In 2018, Google was prosecuted for “search discrimination” by an anti-competitive agency, as the corporation demanded it. The regulator accuses Google of abusing its competitive role on the market to limit handset manufacturers’ right to choose alternate Android models. It is also investigating a situation in which Google has falsely advocated its mobile payment application.
Earlier this month, South Korea’s antitrust regulator said it checked Google’s proposal to charge a 30 percent fee for in-application purchasing from the App Store, extending its analysis of the telecoms regulator in that region.
On Monday the Fair Trade Committee (FTC) of Japan said it is supported by the US and Europe and the four key internet firms – Google, Apple, Amazon, Facebook – will be liable for the business violence.
In 2019, successive antitrust probes into Apple and Amazon were undertaken by the Japan Equal Market Commission. According to the JFTC report, Apple has pressured Japanese firms, by signing contracts, to supply the Apple affiliates proprietary manufacturing technology.
In the same way, JFTC also concluded that Amazon had such unacceptable supplier specifications and subsequently requested that Amazon Japan rectify and repay the suppliers as soon as possible.
In October, a 449-page automated market competitiveness survey study was issued in the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee. Apple, Amazon, Google, and Facebook have been reportedly used to protect future rivals from their “gatekeeper” advantages to enforce their self-preferential conduct.
The commission noted that more rigorous oversight of these corporate giants should be enforced, and it is advisable to create hierarchical distinctions within these technology firms, so as to compel firms to separate or change their market structures. There is much stronger opposition to the application of this strategy.
The Chinese merchant securities are persuaded that the condition would have a bigger effect on the US stock market if drastic steps are taken against Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google.