""Part of his remedy was designed to help new competitors or smaller competitors grow," John B. Kirkwood, who is an expert on antitrust laws and William C. Oltmon Professor of Teaching Excellence at Seattle University School of Law, said. "So to produce greater competition in the future, the remedy had provisions to help Google's rivals." In the past several years, Google has faced three monopolization cases and lost all of them."
""That's particularly important now that AI firms are moving into the search space," Kirkwood said. "There may well be in the near future meaningful choices." And while Google and other web services are already free, he said the cost savings come into play in the advertising. "If there is meaningful competition in search, there will be meaningful competition in search advertising, then the prices of those ads will go down, and that will benefit consumers indirectly because firms won't have to pay as much for their advertising," Kirkwood said. "So eventually, consumers should see lower prices too.""
"Kirkwood used Nike as an example, "If those ad costs go down, Nike's cost will be lower and it can sell sneakers at a lower price. So reductions in ad prices should eventually be passed onto consumers, at least in significant part in lower product in service prices.""
Federal court rulings ordered Google to share certain user data with competitors and included remedies aimed at helping new or smaller rivals grow. Google has lost three recent monopolization cases and faces ongoing DOJ litigation that began years ago. AI firms moving into search may create meaningful choices and increase competition in search advertising, which could reduce ad prices. Lower advertising costs can reduce business expenses and may translate into lower consumer prices, as illustrated with a Nike example. Google plans to appeal the decision. Separately, Amazon faced FTC claims, including a reported $2.5 billion Prime settlement.
Read at KOMO
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]