Archive: https://archive.is/2025.03.08-140200/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/07/technology/trump-google-search-antitrust.html

In a sign that President Trump is following the Biden administration’s lead in reining in Google, the Justice Department on Friday reiterated its demand that a court break up the search giant.

The request followed a landmark ruling last year by Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that found Google had illegally maintained a monopoly in online search by paying web browsers and smartphone manufacturers to feature its search engine. The judge is scheduled to hear arguments on proposed solutions from both the government and Google in April.

Under the Biden administration last year, the Justice Department and a group of states asked Judge Mehta in a preliminary filing to force Google to sell its popular web browser, Chrome, among other remedies. The department’s lawyers on Friday reiterated that demand, which could reshape internet competition.

  • adarza@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    23 hours ago

    i guess they have not ‘contributed’ enough to the new king yet.

  • klu9@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I don’t understand; Pichai was there, meekly applauding at the Dear Leader’s reinauguration…

    Maybe RFK Jr’s running mate Shanahan still has a grudge to bear againt her ex, Sergey Brin.

    The government had also said Google, whose parent company is Alphabet, should be forced to divest its stakes in any artificial intelligence products that could compete with search, a bid to stop the company from dominating the nascent technology.

    The Justice Department changed that portion of its request on Friday, saying instead that Google should have to notify federal and state officials before proceeding with investments in A.I.

    Oh, I think I grok it now…

  • Kualdir@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    22 hours ago

    Maar een tegenstander van een ban stelt: „Boycot liever alle nutteloze rommel die uit China komt.”

    (Someone against a ban says: “Boycott all the useless stuff from China”)

    Why not both?