Business
Nov. 23—Time was when the federal government tried to break up IBM on the grounds it was an illegal monopoly.
After years of litigation, the government eventually said the equivalent of, "Never mind." It was right to do so, considering the onetime alleged monopoly is just another company competing in the marketplace.
Since then, similar concerns prompted the feds to file similar charges against Microsoft in an ill-conceived effort to prevent that company from taking over the world.
When all was said and done, Microsoft continued its business pretty much undisturbed. It didn't take over the world. In fact, technological advances by competitors maintained a vibrant marketplace.
These days, the federal government is going after Google.
A federal judge ruled in August that Google maintains an illegal monopoly on online search and related advertising.
The U.S. Justice Department filed its lawsuit in 2020, challenging Google's 90 percent share of the online search market.
The legal question, of course, is whether Google achieved that level of success by offering consumers a preferred option in online searches or by virtue of anti-competitive practices.
The stakes are high for both Google and the competitors who wish to hobble it. One news account stated that the lawsuit poses an "existential threat to Google and its owner, given its dominance of the search and online advertising business."
The type of litigation is hideously complicated, not just because monopoly-related questions are legally complex but also because of the ever-changing nature of the marketplace, particularly in the field of high tech.
One man's monopoly one day can be just another also-ran the next in a field moving at warp speed.
The question, of course, is now that the judge has ruled, what, if anything, should be done with Google? Naturally, the company's competitors and government lawyers want to inflict maximum restrictions.
Whatever the judge decides, the issue will be appealed for years in the courts.
But the government recently asked the court to strip Google of its widely popular Chrome web browser and impose restrictions that bar its Android operating system from favoring its search engine. If it's not satisfied with the results of its proposed restrictions, the government has the option of forcing Google to divest itself of Android.
There is no doubt the government lawyers overseeing this case are considered tops in their field. But they're still lawyers, not software engineers who developed the once-glamorous products that consumers now view as necessities.