Google hit with THIRD antitrust lawsuit in two months: Bipartisan group of 38 Attorneys General allege the tech giant holds an 'illegal monopoly' on search services

The attorneys general in 35 states, as well as Washington D.C., Guam and Puerto Rico, joined on Thursday to file yet another antitrust lawsuit against Google.

Led by Colorado and Nebraska, the bipartisan group alleges that the search giant has an 'illegal monopoly' over the online search market that hurts consumers and advertisers.

It is the third antitrust lawsuit filed against Google in the past two months.

In October, the Department of Justice accused the $1 trillion California-based company of illegally using its market muscle to hobble rivals.

It was joined by 11 other state attorneys general - all Republicans - when it was filed, and California also asked to join last week.

And just yesterday, ten states, again all led by Republican attorneys general, filed a lawsuit against Google accusing it of 'anti-competitive conduct' in the online advertising industry.

Attorneys general in 35 states, as well as Washington D.C., Guam and Puerto Rico, on Thursday filed another antitrust lawsuit against Google alleging an 'illegal monopoly' on online search

The third lawsuit was announced by Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, pictured above, and filed in federal court in Washington, D.C. on Thursday

The third lawsuit Thursday was announced by Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser and filed in federal court in Washington, D.C.

It mirrors the DoJ lawsuit which claims Google uses anticompetitive agreements to secure a dominant position for its search engine on smartphones.

The three antitrust lawsuits filed against Google since October

October 20: The Department of Justice accused Google of illegally using its market muscle to hobble rivals in an antitrust lawsuit filed with 11 Republican state attorneys general. 

The California Attorney General also asked to join the case on Friday. 

December 16: Ten states, again all led by Republican attorneys general, filed a lawsuit against Google accusing it of 'anti-competitive conduct' in the online advertising industry.

The case, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, targets the heart of the search giant's business - the digital ads that generate nearly all its revenue. 

December 17: The attorneys general in 35 states, as well as Washington D.C., Guam and Puerto Rico file a suit alleging the search giant has an 'illegal monopoly' over the online search market that hurts consumers and advertisers.

The Attorneys General have asked that their case be joined with the DoJ's. 

If accepted, it would greatly expand the allegations made in the federal case.  

Yet this new suit also goes one step further, alleging that Google moved to block or to downrank certain results in searches in the entertainment, travel and home improvement sector.

It claims Google prioritized its own services at the expense of rival websites that also provide search, such as Yelp for local businesses and TripAdvisor for travel.

They said that the suppression has won Google 90 percent market dominance and made it impossible for these smaller rivals.

That dominance can be seen in how a significantly large percentage of Google searches result in the user clicking on no further link as they have already received the information they needed. 

According to Search Engine Journal, more than 50 percent of Google searches end without an organic click on a further link, as users are presented with ads, with a further Google search option such as one for flights, or with an answer box. 

'Consumers are denied the benefits of competition, including the possibility of higher quality services and better privacy protections,' Weiser said in press release.

'Advertisers are harmed through lower quality and higher prices that are, in turn, passed along to consumers,' he added.

New York Attorney General Letitia James also made a statement about the lawsuit on social media, claiming that Google is using our data to 'kill off competitors'.

'I'm filing a lawsuit against @Google with 37 AGs to end its illegal monopoly in search services,' she wrote on Twitter.

'It doesn't take a web search to understand that unchecked corporate power shouldn't have disproportionate control over our data and information.

'For decades, @Google has served as the gatekeeper of the internet and has weaponized our data to kill off competitors and control our decision making. While @Google continues to make billions in profits, we're all paying more for the services we use every day,' James continued.

New York Attorney General Letitia James also made a statement about the lawsuit on social media, claiming that Google was using our data to 'kill off competitors', pictured above

'Just like our lawsuit against @Facebook, today's lawsuit should once again send a clear message to @Google and every other company: Efforts to stifle competition, reduce innovation, or cut privacy protections will be met with the full force of my office.'

The AGs have asked that their case be merged with the October suit filed by the DoJ, according to the New York Times.

The department's case includes similar accusations, but if the suits are combined, it will greatly expand the range of the federal claims against Google Search.

The multiple cases could take years to resolve.  

Google hit back at the new suit in a blog post published later on Thursday in which they claimed that redesigning the search function would harm American businesses and that it has evolved and improved the search results over the years.

'Google Search is designed to provide you with the most relevant results,' the company wrote.

Google hit back at the new suit in a blog post published later on Thursday claiming that it would harm American businesses to redesign its search and be useless to customers

The company said that a redesign would 'harm the quality of your search results'

Google also claimed that a change in the search would 'deprive Americans' of information

'We know that if you don't like the results, we're giving you, you have numerous alternatives—including Amazon, Expedia, TripAdvisor and many others just a click away.'

State AGs who joined the Google antitrust suit alleging its 'illegal monopoly' over the online search market

Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wyoming. 

Washington D.C., Guam and Puerto Rico also joined the suit 

The post then slams Thursday's suit, claiming that it believes they should not have made the improvements they have to benefit customers. 

'To get more specifically to the issues raised in today's lawsuit: it suggests we shouldn't have worked to make Search better and that we should, in fact, be less useful to you,' it states.

'This lawsuit demands changes to the design of Google Search, requiring us to prominently feature online middlemen in place of direct connections to businesses.'

Google then alleges that to change their search design from what it is 'would come at the expense of businesses' and result in them having 'a harder time reaching new customers and competing against big commerce'.

'We know that scrutiny of big companies is important, and we're prepared to answer questions and work through the issues,' the post concludes.

'But this lawsuit seeks to redesign Search in ways that would deprive Americans of helpful information and hurt businesses' ability to connect directly with customers.'

Some experts have agreed that the new suit is likely to harm consumers and small businesses.

'If you are a hotel in Taos, you can't rely on the fact that you have good ratings on Hotels.com or that there was an article that mentioned you in Travel & Leisure, because Google has decided to monetize the vast majority of the first screen of search results,' David Dinielli, a former Justice Department antitrust official, told CNN.

'The only way you can reach the customers you want to reach are to pay Google to ensure you are on that first screen as an ad, rather than as an organic result.' 

 U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr, pictured, had pushed to the antitrust suit to be filed before the presidential election on November 3 and it was hoped to be a win for the Trump administration

The case is the third antitrust salvo to slam Google during the past two months as the Department of Justice and attorneys general from across the U.S. weigh in with their different variations on how they believe the company is abusing its immense power. 

They claimed Google is using this power to do things that harm other businesses, innovation and even consumers who find its services to be indispensable.

In many ways, the flurry of U.S. antitrust suits represents an attempt to catch up with European regulators who have spent the past several years trying to crack down on Google, mostly with huge fines, to little noticeable effect so far.  

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT'S GOOGLE LAWSUIT AT A GLANCE

The Department of Justice lawsuit claims that Google is breaching The Sherman Act by unfairly locking up portions of the market.

There are three facets to how the government claims it does this;  

1) Dominating search engine space

Google, through both its deals placing its search engine above others on devices and through public interest in it, accounts for 80 percent of every internet search in the US 

In 2020, it accounted for 94% of all mobile searches in the US  

2) Monetizing its dominance through ads

Google monetizes the amount people use it with ads, which generate around $40billion in revenue every year 

3) Spending its billions to cement its dominance with 'exclusionary deals'

With the money it makes through ads, Google pays companies like Apple, LG and others to block out any of its competitors from having their search engine preferred on devices 

Among the deals is one with Apple. Google is the default on Safari on iPhones and it's also the default on Siri.

The deal amounts to up to a fifth of Apple's worldwide income which last year would have been around $11billion 

On Wednesday, ten states led by Republican attorneys general filed a lawsuit against Google accusing it of 'anti-competitive conduct' in the online advertising industry, including a deal to manipulate sales with rival Facebook.

The lawsuit, which brands Google as an 'internet Goliath' and was announced by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, targets the heart of the search giant's business - the digital ads that generate nearly all its revenue.

It was prompted by complaints by publishers and other businesses whose publications rely on advertising revenue to survive.

In the lawsuit, Google is accused of striking up an illegal deal with Facebook, a major competitor for online ad sales, to manipulate advertising auction.

Google and Facebook compete heavily in online ad sales and together capture over half of the market globally.

The two players agreed in a publicized deal back in 2018 to start giving Facebook's advertiser clients the option to place ads within Google's network of publishing partners, the lawsuit alleges.

For example, a sneaker blog that uses software from Google to sell ads could end up generating revenue from a footwear retailer that bought ads on Facebook.

Executives at the highest level of the companies signed off on the deal, according to the complaint.

While that deal was announced publicly, the lawsuit alleges that Google failed to disclose it would give Facebook preferential treatment and benefits, including access to the search giant's data.

Texas and 11 other states had already previously joined the Justice Department's landmark antitrust lawsuit against Google that was filed in October.

That federal lawsuit argued that Google illegally used its market power to hobble rivals.

It accused Google of building a great search engine but then fending off competition through exclusive deals with Apple and others.

The suit also alleged that Google abused its dominance in search advertising.

California asked to join the lawsuit on Friday, making the state's attorney general the first Democrat to openly support the litigation.

Google has called the Justice Department lawsuit 'deeply flawed'.

The states began their investigation in 2019 as part of a wave of backlash against big tech companies. 

The multiple suits paint Goolgle as a ruthless giant that chokes off its competition, a far cry from how the company has hoped to present itself. 

'Collectively, this will be a comprehensive examination of Google’s ascent to power over the last 25 years,' William Kovacic, a former chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, told the New York Times of the suits. 

'These are formidable threats to the company.'

While Weiser said Thursday that it is 'premature' to discuss how Google may be brokem up, he remained confident of the states' position despite the company's large legal team.

'We have done a thorough investigation and we feel confident about our case,' he said. 

Shares in Google have dropped since this week's lawsuits were announced, finishing Thursday down by one point. 

Google's full statement on the antitrust lawsuit accusing them of an 'illegal monopoloy' on search 

Our response to today’s lawsuit about the design of Google Search by state attorneys general:

Google Search is designed to provide you with the most relevant results. We know that if you don’t like the results we’re giving you, you have numerous alternatives—including Amazon, Expedia, Tripadvisor and many others just a click away.

So we keep working to improve our results, designing and rolling out helpful features in Search—including maps, links to products and services you can buy directly, flight and hotel options, and local business information like hours of operation and delivery services.

To get more specifically to the issues raised in today’s lawsuit: it suggests we shouldn't have worked to make Search better and that we should, in fact, be less useful to you. When you search for local products and services, we show information that helps you connect with businesses directly and helps them reach more customers. This lawsuit demands changes to the design of Google Search, requiring us to prominently feature online middlemen in place of direct connections to businesses.

Redesigning Google Search this way would harm the quality of your search results. And it would come at the expense of businesses like retailers, restaurants, repair shops, airlines and hotels whose listings in Google help them get discovered, and connect directly with customers. They would have a harder time reaching new customers and competing against big commerce and travel platforms and other aggregators and middlemen.

The data shows that our local results in Search drive more than 4 billion direct connections for businesses every month (such as visits to businesses’ websites, people calling merchants, getting directions to stores, ordering food from restaurants).

Even as we have added content and features to our search results, the volume of traffic we send to non-Google sites has increased every year since Search was created. Our search results page, which used to show 10 links, now shows an average of 26 outgoing links on mobile devices.

The claims being made have been closely examined and rejected by regulators and courts around the world, including the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, competition authorities in Brazil, Canada and Taiwan, and courts in the United Kingdom and Germany, who all agreed that our changes are designed to improve your search results. It’s also well established that the most important driver for our search results is the specific query—not your personal data.

 We know that scrutiny of big companies is important and we’re prepared to answer questions and work through the issues. But this lawsuit seeks to redesign Search in ways that would deprive Americans of helpful information and hurt businesses’ ability to connect directly with customers. We look forward to making that case in court, while remaining focused on delivering a high-quality search experience for our users. 

The lawsuit also contains allegations that have previously been made about how we distribute Search, and about our advertising technologies. On those topics, you can read our blog post, and see more specifics on our competition site.