- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from [email protected]
Microsoft’s Nadella to Testify at Google Antitrust Trial Monday
By Leah Nylen and Dina Bass
October 1, 2023 at 7:00 p.m. EDT
Microsoft Corp. Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella is set to take the stand Monday as part of the Justice Department’s antitrust trial against Google.
The DOJ has accused Alphabet Inc.’s search division of unlawfully maintaining a monopoly by paying $10 billion a year to rivals, smartphone manufacturers and wireless carriers to make its search engine the default option on mobile devices and web browsers. Google has denied the allegations.
To help prove its case, the DOJ hopes to use testimony from Nadella and other executives from Microsoft to show how even a company of its size and resources couldn’t unlock Google’s hold on the search market.
Last week, Microsoft business development executive Jonathan Tinter testified that the Redmond, Washington-based software giant failed to secure a deal to put its Bing search app on Apple’s products, even though it was willing to offer far better terms than Google and lose multiple billions of dollars on the agreement. In the end, Apple signed a fresh deal with Google.
Tinter also told the court that Microsoft’s Surface Duo smartphone was required to use Google search in order to license the Android mobile operating system and was limited from using Bing on its own devices. Nadella was personally involved in discussing some of these issues with his Google counterpart, Sundar Pichai, and will probably be asked about those conversations.
Nadella was instrumental in the development of Bing, created by Microsoft in an ultimately doomed attempt to catch up with Google and capture a chunk of the online advertising market.
While Bing has gained share on desktop computers, where it was integrated with Microsoft’s Internet Explorer and later Edge browser, it has lagged on mobile devices where people overwhelming use Google. Three or so years ago, Microsoft even discussed selling Bing to Apple, a transaction that would have replaced Google as the default option on the iPhone maker’s devices, Bloomberg reported. But a deal never came to fruition.
You must log in or register to comment.
It’s hilarious that Microsoft will be testifying on the antitrust behaviors of another company.
I agree Google can be taken down a few notches, but it defeats the purpose of Microsoft can’t also take some spotlight over the Windows 10, 11, and Edge shenanigans.
Their whole ecosystem is built on antitrust behaviors.
Make no mistake, Nadella is also trying to garner some goodwill by helping with this. He knows they’ll be next, it’s not even a question of “if”, it’s a question of “when”.
It isn’t hilarious, it is just how trials go.
You can be testifying for one, and have a trail of your own in another.
One does not exclude the other.
Let Microsoft executives testify under oath about what monopolistic behavior looks like, then subpoena their internal communications. They’re going to testify against themselves if they tell the truth under oath. If they don’t tell the truth, it’s felony perjury.
So if as a result of this, Google won’t be allowed to pay to have their search engine be the default, does that mean the effective end of Mozilla?
If Mozilla exists only at Google’s pleasure it should either reform or die. As far as Google is concerned Firefox is just a useful tool to avoid anti-competitive regulations because they can claim that an alternative browser engine that isn’t directly influenced by Google exists.
The poor CEO should then lower her 5M paycheck, which is surely deserved, given the great job she did increasing FF usage share /s.
It’s not (just) about paying to have Google Search as default, it’s also about cases where competing offers can’t go through or where they leverage other methods.
in Microsoft’s case they failed even though they were willing to pay more or even provide Apple with their own search engine.
Google also holds their Android trademark and access to Google Play and Google services as a sword hanging above the heads of everybody in the Android ecosystem. Step out of line and you’re effectively booted from the ecosystem.
If you like irony remember Huawei, whose ejection from the Android platform was a textbook example of how much power Google holds over OEM; but it won’t come up at this trial because it was done at the request of the US government so that’s OK.
deleted by creator
I doubt a a court would care about a browser engine monopoly. They’re more concerned with markets and money, not with technical implementation details or open standards. Besides, even if that were to happen, google can point to Safari which is a different implementation with a very large market share.
Safari is locked behind Apple devices so it’s irrelevant outside that particular garden. The most they could use the Safari argument for is to say Google doesn’t have a monopoly on Apple devices.
Firefox and the fact they support it is their only argument for Android and PC. They’ll want to preserve it carefully. They have nothing to gain by squashing Firefox (its market share is already as low as it can go without becoming irrelevant) and everything to lose (it would feed right into ongoing antitrust investigations in EU and US and probably open new ones).
In the US, it seems that courts do not care about “on Apple devices”. They see two markets: mobile devices, and laptops/desktops. Blink based browsers make up a minority in the US on mobile devices due to the dominance of Apple, and while they do have the majority on desktops/laptops, Safari is still double digits and Firefox has a small slice of the pie as well. Even if that was enough, there would still need to be evidence that this is due to anti-competitive measures and not true user preference. This will be hard because Microsoft isn’t publicly being compensated for choosing Blink for edge, nor does google have any wide-scale measures to coerce users onto chrome other than marketing in their own products and services.
You reckon the DoJ may have started the trial without the necessary evidence?
The current trial is about google’s monopoly on search, not browser engines.
