In 1998, Google started as a web search engine, and now, it deployed itself in many areas. After 27 years, in addition to search, Google is offering services such as Google Advertising and Google Chrome. The company also provides Android OS, Gemini and Pixel smartphones. Although it is a success story to ensure that it has also been seen as a monopoly, which does not allow other small businesses to grow. In a recent no-confidence test against Google, the US DOJ declared Google a discovery monopoly and said that a break-up could solve the issue. A few days after this statement, the US FTC supports the decision by DOJ.

FTC supports the doj decision to break Google

For the last three weeks, Google has been entangled in a treatment test steeped by its loss in the landmark antitrust case on its dominance in the search market. As action near its conclusion, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) publicly supported the Department of Justice (DoJ) and its proposed measures are intended to destroy Google’s monopoly and promote greater competition in online search.

According to Reuters, FTC believes that increasing market competition will be forced to strengthen their privacy security measures. One of the more controversial proposals includes data-sharing measures, which Google claims that it will compromise its intellectual property and endangered the user privacy.

The FTC has supported the idea of ​​installation of an overseas body to ensure compliance after the mechanisms used in settlements related to the agency’s own confidentiality.

DOJ Treatment to Help Reason

The Department of Justice Justice is calling widespread and ambitious measures to disrupt what it describes as a darker cycle of monopoly. After declaring it a monopoly, the authorities suggested Google to sell their chrome browser. The department argues that Chrome, which commands more than 4 billion users worldwide, acts as a “entrance to search” and accounts for 35 percent of all user questions. Forcing their partition, officials believe that people can largely re -constitute how people reach the Internet.

In addition, the government is demanding to ban Google from entering the default search engine agreements – such as an annual deal of $ 20 billion with Apple. This system, it claims, creates an uneven sports ground that effectively prevents contestants from setting up a leg in the market.

Another important remedy that is to provide rivals for Google to provide access to their huge discovery dataset, including its index and results. The idea of ​​giving equipment to other companies to develop competitive search services. However, Google compared it to hand over the firm’s “Crown Jewels”, which warns that it causes serious risk, including the potential risk of users’ personal information.

Google has worked hard by branding the proposed measures as “extreme” and “fundamentally flawed”. It says that its success stems from “hard work, innovation and smart business decisions”, including early investment in mobile search, and argues that punishing the company for its achievements will send a wrong message.

The legal representatives of the tech veteran further stated that the ban on default search deals and implementing data-sharing would actually cause damage competition. He argues that it will enable rivals to benefit from Google’s investment without similar efforts, eventually discouraging innovation. For Chrome, Google insists that it is not a viable standalone product and only acts effectively as part of its integrated ecosystem.