The U.S. Department of Justice is ramping up its case against Google’s alleged monopoly, suggesting the government could eventually force the company to sell its widely-used Chrome browser. The move is part of the DoJ’s push to challenge Google’s hold over the digital advertising and search engine markets.

The Justice Department’s latest legal action accuses Google of engaging in anticompetitive behavior by unfairly using its dominance in search and advertising to prop up its other services, most notably Chrome. The government argues that Google’s browser and vast data ecosystem have given the company an outsized advantage over competitors, stifling innovation and harming consumers. By bundling Chrome with its Android operating system, Google has built an extensive network that could limit consumer choice and make it difficult for smaller firms to compete.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    142
    ·
    2 days ago

    Justice Department is 100% lobbing this over to JD Vance’s buddy Peter Thiel who’s going to enshittify it even further and turn it with its massive install base into a tool for techno-fascism.

    • biofaust@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      I must say that, as a European using a Firefox fork for my daily browsing while waiting for Ladybird, I don’t see that outcome as completely negative: Google, somehow, in America has kept a completely unjustified good vibes feeling surrounding itself, while Thiel is much more evil in the public eye.

      If Chrome is associated with him in anyway it can become a more lucid image of itself.

        • biofaust@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I am not sure about that within US Law, but given what it usually sums up to, yes, it is a risk, which would make things even faster, possibly.

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        35
        ·
        2 days ago

        I really don’t think this is true. It might push some politically engaged users to Firefox, but unlike Musk, most people don’t know who Thiel is, and as long as he keeps it that way, nobody will care.

        • biofaust@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          2 days ago

          That’s when we come onto the scene.

          I am continuously “translating” news and opinions from here on LinkedIn. Already got banned from a professional Slack that contains most people in my industry for saying in a private conversation that I like watermelon.

          Not gonna stop. People are not politically inclined because we kept our knowledge to ourselves for too long.

          • tomenzgg@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            For a second, I read your fruit predilection literally and was like, “Is…watermelon controversial, now? Are they [the people who banned you] cartoonishly racist?”

            I follow you, now; sucks but expected…

        • Ledericas@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          FF depends on google ad money, thats why FF is currently enshittifying right now.

      • green@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Acceleration-ism does not work.

        If the USA has not taught you this, after this reckless takeover, nothing will save you.

        The more likely outcome is for Chrome to become a North Korea RedStar equivalent, where you cannot freely access the internet without Chrome. And if you visit a resource with wrongspeak, the resource will have all its finances taken away (see the legislation surrounding section 230); with you being sent to El Salvador.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Please, do it! That’s going to eviscerate Chrome’s userbase and push these Chromium browsers to fork so fast it’ll make his head spin.

      • pivot_root@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 days ago

        You’re putting way too much faith in the typical consumer. Enshittifying Chrome even more would piss its users off, but inertia and its market dominance would keep most of them continuing to use it while complaining about how bad it is.

        Remember: It took 8 years for Chrome to drag Internet Explorer to the point where less than 10% of people actually used it. And that’s with Firefox already being a competitor to it for years.

        • Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Google would still own android and may not be inclined to keep chrome as the default. That is a significant portion of the browser’s user base.

          With default search engine agreements being threatened, it may shake out where Google and Firefox agreed to make Firefox the default android browser in exchange for keeping Google their default search engine.