Lawmakers and attorneys general say they are concerned that the four business giants control too much of their respective markets and may engage in anti-competitive practices. A bipartisan group from the antitrust subcommittee (of the House Judiciary Committee) sent written requests to the four companies earlier this month, seeking documents and internal communications related to market share and dominance. The companies have been asked to respond by October 14.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, one of lead investigators in the Google probe, insisted, however, that the concerns are not simply a response to the search engine behemoth’s size or market power. Paxton stated that Google had engaged in “business practices [that] may have undermined consumer choice, stifled innovation, violated users’ privacy and put Google in control of the flow and dissemination of online information.”
This isn’t the first time antitrust concerns have been directed at Silicon Valley. Insiders say, however, that the current probe differs from the antitrust allegations against Microsoft in 1998. That lawsuit focused almost exclusively on one company and one market—Microsoft and its alleged software monopoly. In the Google and Facebook investigations, government attorneys will look at how the companies manage and use consumer data, how they target their advertising, and their respective roles as gatekeepers of communication.
Under state and federal laws, prosecutors and other officials can engage in a number of measures to encourage and promote competition within an industry. One possible outcome—Google may be broken up into smaller companies that can, ideally, lead to more competition for services.
The goal of the antitrust laws is to increase competition, which should provide concrete benefits to consumers. The breakup of Google would potentially provide the following benefits to individuals and businesses seeking legal services: