A bid to break up Alphabet Inc.’s Google is one of the options being considered by the Justice Department after a landmark court ruling found that the company monopolized the online search market, according to people with knowledge of the deliberations.
  • hanabatake@lemmy.ml
    1·
    1 month ago

    Breakup Divesting the Android operating system, used on about 2.5 billion devices worldwide, is one of the remedies that’s been most frequently discussed by Justice Department attorneys, according to the people. In his decision, Mehta found that Google requires device makers to sign agreements to gain access to its apps like Gmail and the Google Play Store.

    It would be wonderful

  • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
    0·
    1 month ago

    If the Justice Department pushes ahead with a breakup plan, the most likely units for divestment are the Android operating system and Google’s web browser Chrome

    Hell yes. If Android is divested from Google, that would significantly reduce Google’s attempts to lock down the OS, and would probably make alternative app stores more popular as the Play Store becomes just one of many options for manufacturers that would no longer be required to provide it on all Android devices.

    And as for Chrome, about damn time. A browser with that much marketshare shouldn’t also be owned by the largest search engine and ad network. That’s just a recipe for monopolizing internet standards and access.

    Another option would require Google to divest or license its data to rivals, such as Microsoft’s Bing or DuckDuckGo

    More competition in the search engine space? Sign me up. Google has too much control over the quality of search results simply due to their size.

    • Illecors@lemmy.cafeEnglish
      1·
      1 month ago

      The split up should happen, but don’t wear the pink glasses. Transitional period will be ripe with scams of all kind.

    • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      1·
      1 month ago

      Next up:

      • Content providers like Disney
      • All big airliners that are left ( the big four, basically)
      • Boeing
      • All large ISP’s
      • Any company that has more that 30% of the market share
      • All companies that are in a market that only has 3 or less suppliers
      • All insurers
      • All companies with more than 10.000 employees I can go on for a while.
      • All companies that pay less than 25% tax, for whatever fucking reason.
      • All companies whose owners pay less tax than their lowest paid workers
      • All companies that received more than a million dollar in government funds yet completely and utterly failed to meet any of the required targets for that money (Hello SpaceX and just about every Musk company!)

      I’m all for capitalism, but not the current near limitless capitalism

      • Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        0·
        1 month ago

        I’m all for capitalism, but not the current near limitless capitalism

        That’s just capitalism. Capital is power and if you allow people to be more powerful than others, they will use that power to amass more power. There never was and never will be limitless capitalism because we live in a finite world but there will be limitless suffering for the sake of profit.

        • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
          0·
          1 month ago

          That is a way too simplistic take.

          I mean capitalism is good as long as you have strong laws against monopolies, oligopolies, higher taxes the richer you get up to 100% at a certain income point. Don’t allow ownership of 100 houses for anyone (or any company), limit the maximum size of companies in value and employees, that sort of thing…

          • Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            1·
            1 month ago

            Yeah, then it can just export all of the problems to other countries and abuse the hell out of those with no power to fight back.

            • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
              11·
              1 month ago

              Oh yeah, and communism famously was never abusive to other countries. The USSR never never ever abused anyone inside and outside, same as China, they would neeeeever!

              • Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
                1·
                1 month ago

                This is some peak capitalist realism. Never once did I say that communism was the solution, I provided no solutions at all actually, and I simply pointed out the flaws in capitalism but you know so little about economic systems to go to communism.

                Can’t do any more mental gymnastics to defend capitalism so you go to fear of another system not even discussed. You and I are not immune to propaganda and if you believe in democracy then why would your workplace not be democratic? The manufacturers never would have voted to move their jobs to China during the late 20th century. The capitalists did it. Walmart was a small family business and now it’s the largest employer in the US and half of it is owned by people born into a specific family like a monarchy.

                I get that you support Keynesian economics but this was before globalism and you can’t rely on a government to fight capitalism in places it doesn’t govern.