Google search is in the news. Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google search is a monopoly and is behaving in a manner that suppresses search competition with their distribution agreements. The debate on this has started,...
The Web Can Thrive Without Google’s Search Monopoly
Viable browsers and meaningful contributions to web standards can be sustained with more modest revenue streams, writes Alissa Cooper.
Search has its own bitter lesson
Human incentives to make content findable to your search matter more than technology
Why Google’s New AI-Saturated Search Page Will Be A Disaster
Google didn’t invent full-text search of the Internet – that honor belongs to early pioneers such as WebCrawler, Lycos and AltaVista. But for the last 25 years or so, Google has…
The Technical Feasibility of Divesting Google Chrome – Knight-Georgetown Institute
As the European Commission advances efforts under the Digital Markets Act to require Google to share its search data with competitors, lessons from historic antitrust remedies underscore how data access could be transformational in the AI-powered search market. While the Commission’s proposals represent a novel and comprehensive approach, key improvements to data scope and sharing frequency, privacy protections, and dispute resolution are needed. US courts and enforcers charged with implementing similar provisions should take note.
Once Unimaginable, Publishers Are Preparing to Opt Out of Google Search
The nuclear option is gaining traction as web traffic collapses and Google refuses to negotiate with content creators
Waiting for dawn in search: Search index, Google rulings and impact on Kagi
This blog post is a follow-up to Dawn of a new era in Search, published last year. A lot has changed: the legal case has advanced, AI has become the central battleground, and the need for...
Google’s Chrome Antitrust Paradox
This Article examines Google’s dominance of the browser market, highlighting how Google’s Chrome browser plays a critical role in reinforcing Google’s dominance in other markets. While Google portrays Chrome as a neutral platform built on open-source technologies, this Article shows that Chrome is, in fact, instrumental in Google’s strategy to reinforce its dominance in the online advertising, publishing, and browser markets. The examination of Google’s strategic acquisitions, anticompetitive practices, and the implementation of so-called “privacy controls” underlines that Chrome is far from a neutral gateway to the web. Rather, it serves as a key tool for Google to maintain and extend its market power, often to the detriment of competition and innovation in the digital economy.This Article illustrates how Chrome not only bolsters Google’s position in online advertising and publishing through practices such as coercion and self-preferencing, but also leverages its advertising clout to engage in a “pay-to-play” paradigm—the cornerstone of Google’s larger strategy of market control. It also outlines potential regulatory interventions and remedies by drawing on historical antitrust precedents. Lastly, this Article proposes a triad of solutions motivated by an analysis of Google’s abuse of Chrome, including behavioral remedies targeting specific anticompetitive practices, structural remedies involving an internal separation of Google’s divisions, and divestiture of Chrome from Google into an independent organization.Despite Chrome’s dominance and its critical role in Google’s ecosystem, as well as its recent legal troubles with the Department of Justice, it so far has avoided significant antitrust action. A key reason for this inaction lies in the long-standing precedent supporting the hegemony of technology firms and the uncertainty surrounding Chrome’s viability as a standalone entity. This Article attempts to address these issues to enable antitrust actions that are essential in remedying current market imbalances. Such actions are also critical to mitigate future threats to competition from an increasingly monopolistic technology landscape, thereby fostering a competitive digital environment that promotes innovation and protects consumer interests.
Google v Microsoft: the battle of AI business models
The search giant’s vertically integrated approach is beginning to pay off
Google Search Is Dying. What Comes Next Is Worse | The Walrus
As AI eats the web, the internet’s collective memory is disappearing
Google Is Building an A.I. Fence Around the Internet It Once Championed
As Google incorporates more artificial intelligence into search, people are spending more time on Google. Some website operators are crying foul.
Google Is Building an A.I. Fence Around the Internet It Once Championed
As Google incorporates more artificial intelligence into search, people are spending more time on Google. Some website operators are crying foul.
Is Google about to destroy the web?
Google says adding more AI to its search engine will rejuvenate the internet. Others predict an apocalypse for websites. One thing is clear: this era of online history is closing.
Remembering the pre-Google web, when search was an experiment
Most people have completely forgotten how chaotic it really was."
Pluralistic: The worst possible antitrust outcome (03 Sep 2025) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow
Last year, Google lost an antitrust case to Biden's DoJ. The DoJ lawyers beat Google like a drum, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that Google had deliberately sought to create and maintain a monopoly over search, and that they'd used that monopoly to make search materially worse, while locking competitors out of the market.
Verdicts against Meta and Google may bring a new era of big tech accountability
Advocates hope recent verdicts against social media platforms will build momentum for bigger changes in Silicon Valley.
The True Cost of Browser Innovation: Why Chrome's Divestiture Wouldn't End the Open Web
It is crucial for the public to understand that the web’s growth and innovation need not depend on Google’s monopoly or control, writes Alissa Cooper.
