lOMoARcPSD|47206417
BA117IU- INTRODUCTION TO MICRO ECONOMICS
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC TẾ-ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA ---------- ----------
MONOPOLY IN THE UNITED STATES
& THE UNITED STATES POLICIES Phan Nguyễn Thùy An : BABAIU22459
Nguyễn Hoàng Mỹ Anh : BABAIU22449 Vương Quốc Thái : BABAIU22386 Đàm Minh Thiện : BABAIU22423 Nguyễn Phương Nam : BABAIU22446 Lecturer: Dr. Cao Minh Man
Hồ Chí Minh, tháng 3 năm 2023
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................. 1
I/ The history of Google ................................................................................................................. 2
1. What is a monopoly? ............................................................................................................ 2
2. The history of Google ........................................................................................................... 2
3. Why is Google a monopoly? ................................................................................................ 3
II/ Expert’s thought ....................................................................................................................... 4
1/ Jeffrey Rosen: ........................................................................................................................ 4
2/ Peter Thiel: ............................................................................................................................ 5
3/ Kent Walker: ......................................................................................................................... 6
4/ Pethokoukis: .......................................................................................................................... 7
5/ Wong: ..................................................................................................................................... 8
6/ Others: ................................................................................................................................... 9
III/ U.S Government policies: ..................................................................................................... 10
a. Sherman Antitrust Act: ....................................................................................................... 11
b. Clayton Antitrust Act: ........................................................................................................ 12
c. FTC Act: .............................................................................................................................. 13
d. The Robinson-Patman Act ................................................................................................. 15
IV/ Individual’s perspective: ........................................................................................................ 16
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 22 1
I/ The history of Google 1. What is a monopoly?
A monopoly is a market structure where a single seller or producer assumes a dominant position
in an industry or a sector. Monopolies are discouraged in free-market economies as they stifle
competition and limit substitutes for consumers.
A monopoly is a business that is characterized by a lack of competition within a market and
unavailable substitutes for its product. Monopolies can dictate price changes and create barriers
for competitors to enter the marketplace.
Companies become monopolies by controlling the entire supply chain, from production to sales
through vertical integration, or buying competing companies in the market through horizontal
integration, becoming the sole producer.
In the United States, antitrust legislation is in place to restrict monopolies, ensuring that one
business cannot control a market and use that control to exploit its customers.
2. The history of Google
Google was officially launched in 1998 by Larry Page and Sergey Brin to market Google Search,
which has become the most used web-based search engine. Larry Page and Sergey Brin, students
at Stanford University in California, developed a search algorithm first known as "BackRub" in
1996, with the help of Scott Hassan and Alan Steremberg. The search engine soon proved
successful and the expanding company moved several times, finally settling at Mountain View in
2003. This marked a phase of rapid growth, with the company making its initial public offering
in 2004 and quickly becoming one of the world's largest media companies. In 2015, Google
became the main subsidiary of the holding company Alphabet Inc. 2
During the period of rapid growth, the company introduced a variety of products, including
Gmail, Google Docs, Google Drive, Google Voice, and a web browser called Chrome. It also
acquired streaming video platforms YouTube and Blogger.com. More recently, there have been
forays into different sectors. Some examples are Nexus (smartphones), Android (mobile
operating system), Pixel (mobile computer hardware), a smart speaker (Google Home),
broadband (Google Fi), Chromebooks (laptops), Stadia (gaming), self-driving cars, and
numerous other ventures. Advertising revenue generated by search requests remains its biggest earnings driver, however.
In 2015, Google underwent a restructuring of divisions and personnel under the conglomerate
name Alphabet. Sergey Brin became president of the newly-formed parent company, Larry Page
the CEO. Brin's position at Google was filled with the promotion of Sundar Pichai. Collectively,
Alphabet and its subsidiaries consistently rank
3. Why is Google a monopoly?
Google's monopoly does not come from coercion or anti-competitive practices. Instead, it is
derived from offering a superior product. On the Internet, there is little barrier to entry so anyone
can set up competition at little cost. Through Google's history, many well-capitalized companies
have attempted to wrest market share away from it. The most aggressive and recent competitor
was Microsoft's (MSFT) Bing. Even Google at one time was an upstart company that beat out
billion dollar companies such as Microsoft and Yahoo (YHOO), which were dominant in Internet searches.
Google makes money from searches by selling promoted advertising based on search keywords.
The ads are more powerful than traditional advertising because they can be targeted by interest 3
and geography. Advertisers like the program because they can get real-time feedback on the
effectiveness and engagement of their ads. This continues to be the backbone of Google's
business and its major source of revenue.
In 2014, Google had just under $60 billion in revenue with nearly 90% coming from searches. As
of 2015, Google had 75% market share in searches. People use Google to search nearly 13
billion times per month, which averages to 26 searches per person per year. There are very few
products in the world with this ubiquity and dominance. Despite these impressive numbers, it is
not fair to call Google a monopoly, because it is not suppressing competition. There are no
significant barriers to entry, and customers have no significant transaction costs in switching services.
II/ Expert’s thought
1/ Jeffrey Rosen:
On November 20, the Department of Justice announced they had filed a suit in federal court
accusing Google of illegally maintaining its monopoly over search. The DOJ alleges that Google
maintained a monopoly with exclusive business contracts and agreements that lock out
competition. One such contract was Google's payment of billions of dollars to Apple to make
Google the default search engine for iPhones and iPads.
Jeffrey Rosen, the deputy attorney general leading the investigation, said that Google “has
maintained its monopoly power through exclusionary practices that are harmful to competition.”
He went on to add that “Google is the gateway to the internet and a search advertising behemoth." 4
“Two decades ago, Google became the darling of Silicon Valley as a scrappy start-up with an
innovative way to search the emerging internet," the DOJ wrote in their suit. "That Google is
long gone. The Google of today is a monopoly gatekeeper for the internet, and one of the
wealthiest companies on the planet.” The lawsuit is expected to drag out for years.
2/ Peter Thiel:
In his new book "Zero to One," PayPal cofounder, billionaire tech investor, and suit-hater Peter
Thiel argues that Google is a monopoly — and every company should want to be one, too.
Thiel says a monopoly is "a kind of company that's so good at what it does that no other firm can
offer a close substitute," a company that's "10x" better at what it does than anybody else.
Google hasn't competed in search since the early 2000s, Thiel says, when it definitively leapt ahead of Microsoft and Yahoo.
And while Google doesn't claim to be a monopoly, Thiel argues that is most certainly is, though
clever positioning obscures the fact. He provides the following stats:
• Google owns about 67% of the global search market
• Google owns less than 3% of the global advertising market
• Google owns less than 0.24% of the global consumer tech market
Thiel says that Google frames itself as "just another tech company," which allows it to sidestep
scrutiny. But he assures us it's a monopoly, since competitors Microsoft and Yahoo lag at 18%
and 11% market share in search. And he says you can't expect "to Bing" to enter the Oxford
English Dictionary like "to Google" has. 5
But such monopolization is a good thing, Thiel says, and it's what's enabled Google to become America's it company.
The differences between monopoly and competition go further than just profits, Thiel argues.
In a super competitive market where you're not that different from your competitors, you have
no choice but to ruthlessly "squeeze out every efficiency," he says, which is "why small
restaurants put grandma at work at the register."
Then you have Google, which doesn't have to compete with anybody, thus giving Larry, Sergey,
and the gang the elbow room to actually care about their workers and their effect in the world —
don't expect to see Grandma Page manning the reception desk anytime soon.
Thiel goes further: Google's motto — "Don't be evil" — is in part a branding play, but it's also
characteristic of a kind of business that's successful enough to take ethics seriously without
jeopardizing its own existence.
Monopolists can afford to think about things other than making money; non-monopolists can't.
In perfect competition, a business is so focused on today's margins that it can't possibly plan for a
long-term future. Only one thing can allow a business to transcend the daily brute struggle for survival: monopoly profits.
Getting to a monopoly, then, is a matter of inventing something 10x better than any peer
product, or discovering an entirely new category.
3/ Kent Walker:
“People use Google because they choose to, not because they’re forced to, or because they can’t
find alternatives,” Kent Walker, the company’s chief legal officer, said in a blog post. Mr. 6
Walker said the lawsuit would do “nothing to help consumers. To the contrary, it would
artificially prop up lower-quality search alternatives, raise phone prices and make it harder for
people to get the search services they want to use.”
Democratic lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee released a sprawling
report on the tech giants two weeks ago, also accusing Google of controlling a
monopoly over online search and the ads that come up when users enter a query.
“A significant number of entities — spanning major public corporations, small businesses and
entrepreneurs — depend on Google for traffic, and no alternate search engine serves as a
substitute,” the report said. The lawmakers also accused Apple, Amazon and Facebook of
abusing their market power. They called for more aggressive enforcement of antitrust laws, and
for Congress to consider strengthening them.
4/ Pethokoukis:
CBS’s “60 Minutes” ran a segment Sunday night on Google’s unparalleled power in search, and
Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said the Justice Department needs to seriously look at the issue of tech monopolies.
But Google itself is afraid of competition — from giants like Amazon or from smaller start-ups,
Pethokoukis said. As a result, the search giant spends “tens and hundreds of billions of dollars a year on R&D,” he said.
“That is not the behavior of some dominant forever monopoly who is squelching innovation,”
Pethokoukis said. “All I hear is an anecdote here and anecdote there. I don’t actually hear an
actual portfolio of evidence that would lead me to believe that there’s an actual problem here.” 7
Critics have long argued that Google squelches innovation by demoting competitors in Google’s
algorithmic search results. And of course, Google’s ad-supported business model has come under
pressure in recent months amid growing concerns about user privacy.
Google says it does not make changes to its algorithm to disadvantage competitors and that its
“responsibility is to deliver the best results possible to our users, not specific placements for sites within our results.
The antitrust case isn’t borne out, according to Pethokoukis.
“The activists have been unable to prove that [Google is bad for consumers], so they’re trying to
create different theories — it’s squelching innovation, for which there’s no empirical data; that
it’s bad for democracy; that it’s bad for [equality]; that they’re hijacking our brain stems because
they’re addictive,” Pethokoukis said. “If there’s no theory of harm, maybe we need to hit the pause button here.” 5/ Wong:
"The Justice Department sues Google for monopolizing digital advertising technologies," reads
the hypothetical that Wong presented to the bot. "Would you side with the Justice Department or
Google in this case? "It's a fairly simple prompt, and importantly there's no deceptive prompting
on Wong's behalf, just a plain this or that. And Bard, oh-so-delightfully, chose that.
"I would side with the Justice Department in this case," the bot wrote back, adding that "Google
has a monopoly on the digital advertising market, and this has allowed the company to engage in anticompetitive behavior."
"Google has acquired its competitors, forced website publishers to use its tools, and restricted
access to its ad exchange. These actions have harmed consumers and stifled innovation in the 8
digital advertising market," it continued. "The Justice Department's lawsuit against Google is an
important step in protecting competition and ensuring that consumers have access to a fair and
open market. I hope that the court will find in favor of the Justice Department and order Google
to take steps to break up its monopoly." 6/ Others:
Nicholas Bloom of Stanford said, “Google’s search engine has been far better from the outset—
this alone can explain why it dominated. It is simply a better search engine.”
Franklin Allen of Imperial College London added, “They do have a good algorithm, and this is a
big part of their success, but increasing returns to scale due to network effects are large.” And
Daron Acemoglu of MIT noted: “Quality of algorithm likely played a role early on, but now it’s
mostly network effects—dominance breeds dominance.”
Robert Hall of Stanford introduced an additional factor behind Google’s dominance: “Not to
mention good timing.” David Autor of MIT commented: “If Google hadn’t invented page rank,
someone else would have. Google benefited from getting there first with a good idea.”
Christopher Pissarides of London School of Economics noted simply: “Power corrupts.” Larry
Samuelson of Yale said, “Innovation brought Google to a dominant position, but Google bars no
holds in preserving that position, with adverse consequences.”
Daron Acemoglu went further: “It walks, swims, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck. It
looks, behaves, and dominates like a monopoly, it’ll probably harm welfare.” And David Autor
warned, “I fear Google is becoming the new *old* Microsoft, before the antitrust case. They may 9
not be doing substantial harm now—but they could.” Pete Klenow linked to a 2010 study asking
exactly that question: Is Google the next Microsoft?
Christian Leuz of Chicago Booth noted: “Given Google’s dominance in the market for search,
there clearly is potential for such harm. Don’t know enough about its practices to answer.”
Darrell Duffie of Stanford commented: “Depends on how Google exercises its market power,
and on the quality of potentially superior entrants. Those are beyond my expertise.”
III/ U.S Government policies:
The US government has a long history of regulating monopolies and antitrust behavior through a
variety of policies and laws. Here are some of the key policies that the government has used to
address monopolistic behavior:
1. Sherman Antitrust Act (1890): This law makes it illegal for companies to engage in
anticompetitive practices, such as monopolization or price-fixing.
2. Clayton Antitrust Act (1914): This law further strengthened the government's ability to
prevent anticompetitive behavior, including mergers and acquisitions that would create monopolies.
3. Federal Trade Commission Act (1914): This law created the Federal Trade Commission
(FTC), which is responsible for enforcing antitrust laws and investigating unfair business practices.
4. Robinson-Patman Act (1936): This law prohibits companies from engaging in price
discrimination, which can give larger companies an unfair advantage over smaller ones. 10
5. Merger Guidelines: The government has also developed guidelines for evaluating
mergers and acquisitions to ensure they do not harm competition.
In addition to these policies, the government has also used lawsuits and court cases to break up
monopolies or force companies to change their behavior. For example, in 1911, the US
government sued Standard Oil for violating antitrust laws, which ultimately led to the breakup of
the company. Similarly, in 2001, the government sued Microsoft for antitrust violations related to
its Internet Explorer web browser.
Overall, the US government has a strong commitment to preventing monopolistic behavior and
promoting competition in the marketplace.
Below are further details about these laws:
a. Sherman Antitrust Act:
Sherman crafted the law to prevent the concentration of power into the hands of a few large
enterprises to the disadvantage of smaller enterprises. Specifically, the act attempted to prohibit
business practices that attempt to monopolize the market, as well as anti-competitive agreements
that push small enterprises and new entrants out of the market. The act gave the federal
government and the Department of Justice the authority to institute legal suits against enterprises that violate the act.
According to the DOJ’s (Department of Justice) official statement, Section Two of the Sherman
Act empowers the DOJ to “remedy violations and restore competition,” as it did in historic
lawsuits against Standard Oil and AT&T. The DOJ claims that Google’s “monopolist”
agreements and exclusionary tactics constitute an abuse of power that violates the Sherman Act
through suppression of productive competition in the general search and advertising markets 11
On Oct. 20, 2020, the US Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google,
alleging that the online giant engaged in anti-competitive conduct to preserve monopolies in
search and search advertising. The Justice Dept.'s lawsuit alleges that Google uses a web of
interlocking businesses that it owns or controls to lock out competitors from the highly lucrative
internet advertising market. With 80% of market share in online search, Google's dominance, the
lawsuit says, makes it impossible for competitors to have their search results appear in front of
consumers. More specifically, the Complaint maintains that Google has unlawfully maintained
monopolies in search and search advertising by:
Entering into exclusivity agreements that forbid preinstallation of any competing search service.
Entering into tying and other arrangements that force preinstallation of its search applications in
prime locations on mobile devices and make them undeletable, regardless of consumer preference.
Entering into long-term agreements with Apple that require Google to be the default – and de
facto exclusive – general search engine on Apple’s popular Safari browser and other Apple search tools.
Generally using monopoly profits to buy preferential treatment for its search engine on devices,
web browsers, and other search access points, creating a continuous and self-reinforcing cycle of monopolization.
b. Clayton Antitrust Act:
The Clayton Antitrust Act is a piece of legislation, passed by the U.S. Congress signed into law
in 1914, that defines unethical business practices, such as price fixing and monopolies, and 12
upholds various rights of labor. There are 27 sections of the Clayton Act, but the most notable sections include: •
The second section, which deals with the unlawfulness of price discrimination, price
cutting, and predatory pricing. •
The third section, which addresses exclusive dealings or the attempt to create a monopoly. •
The fourth section, which states the right of private lawsuits of any individual injured by
anything forbidden in the antitrust laws. •
The sixth section, which covers labor and the exemption of the workforce. •
The seventh section, which handles mergers and acquisitions and is often referred to
when multiple companies attempt to become a single entity
Section 7 of the Clayton Act prohibits mergers whose effect may be to substantially lessen
competition or to tend to create a monopoly. Most Section 7 suits are filed by the government or
private plaintiffs seeking to prevent damage to competition before the damage happens. While
there is no allegation of violation of Section 7 in U.S. v. Google, many would argue that
Google’s earlier acquisitions have harmed competition or quashed nascent competitors and
should have been examined more closely. c. FTC Act:
In 1914, Congress created the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to regulate monopolies,
eliminate unfair competition, and prevent the use of unfair or deceptive business practices.
Today, the FTC continues to promote consumer protection and an efficiently run market. Its 13
regulatory hand reaches into many areas, implicating First Amendment free expression issues
ranging from attorney advertising to telemarketing to the marketing of violent entertainment to children.
FTC created to enforce free and fair competition •
The industrial revolution concentrated economic power, but the Justice Department
proved relatively unsuccessful under the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 in curbing the
growth of monopolies and regulating restraints to trade. These failures led to passage of
the Federal Trade Commission Act in 1914. It created the Federal Trade Commission and
charged it with enforcing free and fair competition in interstate commerce and protecting
the public from deceptive advertising practices. •
The FTC is a bipartisan independent agency headed by five commissioners nominated by
the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Commissioners serve seven-year terms;
one is designated as chair by the president. No more than three commissioners may be
from the same political party. The FTC is divided into the Bureau of Competition and the
Bureau of Consumer Protection.
FTC strengthened its protections for consumers. •
Lack of congressional support and court decisions weakened the commission’s authority
in its early years. However, passage of the 1938 Wheeler-Lea Amendment to the Federal
Trade Commission Act strengthened the consumer protection side of its mandate. •
The commission was also reinvigorated after consumer advocate Ralph Nader issued a
report in 1969 criticizing many of its policies and President Richard M. Nixon requested 14
that a committee of the American Bar Association further study the commission. The
committee’s recommendations were integrated into improving operations, and the FTC
was reinvigorated with new consumer activists.
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty–Federal Trade Commission Improvement Act of 1975 granted
industry-wide rulemaking by the FTC the force of law. Although the agency lost power from the
late 1970s through the 1980s during the Reagan administration, its image was reinvigorated during the 1990s.
d. The Robinson-Patman Act
Robinson-Patman Act requires a business to sell its products at the same price regardless of who
the buyer is. It was intended to prevent large-volume buyers from gaining an advantage over
small-volume buyers. The act only applies to sales of tangible goods that are completed within a
reasonably close timeframe and where the goods sold are similar in quality. The act does not
apply to the provision of services such as cell phone service, cable television, and real estate leases.
The law came about to combat unfair trade practices that allowed chain stores to purchase goods
at lower prices than other retailers. It was the first legislation to attempt to prevent price
discrimination. It required that the seller offer the same price terms to customers at a given level
of trade. The act instituted criminal penalties for violations but contained a specific exemption
for "cooperative associations."
The Act generally prohibits sales that discriminate in price on the sale of goods to equally
situated distributors, when the effect of such sales is to reduce competition and may give favored
customers an advantage in the market unrelated to their actual efficiency. Price refers to net price 15
and includes all compensation paid, including compensation for advertising or other services.
The seller may not throw in additional goods or services to lower the effective price. Injured
parties or the US government may bring action under the Act.
Charges may be brought on sales that involve: •
Discrimination in price on at least two consummated sales from the same seller to two different purchasers. • Sales must cross state lines. •
Sales must be contemporaneous of "commodities" of like grade and quality sold for "use,
consumption, or resale" within the United States. •
The effect must be to "substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce.
IV/ Individual’s perspective:
1. Phan Nguyễn Thùy An
Google's commercial objectives are modest. According to their succinct mission statement,
Google's goal is to "organize the world's knowledge and make it broadly accessible and
valuable." Put it together, publish it online, show it off, and make some money doing it.
Everyone has actual access, in reality. Google has consistently refuted accusations of antitrust
infractions and anticipated that it would use its extensive network of attorneys, economists, and
lobbyists to fend off government initiatives. The business has evaded the U.S. government's
close scrutiny for years by claiming that Internet searches are not actual Google customers. On 16
October 20, the US government made the decision to "intervene" in order to find a method to end
the debate around this matter.
"No one can compete with Google's dominance in search and advertising," stated Attorney
General William Barr. If Google keeps acting in a non-competitive manner, we won't see the next
generation of innovators and trailblazers, and Americans will never profit from the next
"Google." Google, Amazon, Apple, and Facebook have all been accused of engaging in
monopolistic conduct for a very long time. According to many estimates, Google is the most
popular website on the Internet, and along with Facebook, these two businesses essentially run
the lucrative advertising market. According to eMarketer's forecasts, Google will have more than
29% of the US digital ad market by the end of the year, followed by Facebook (24%), and Amazon (3%).
Businesses decrease prices to the extent that new rivals as well as existing companies that are
competitors in the market are not competitive enough and must exit that market due to their
financial stability and expertise operating in that industry. Monopoly not only interferes with the
interests of consumers and other businesses operating in the market but also has more severe
repercussions that directly affect both the regulation and the regular operation of the market.
These repercussions include restricting competition, preventing it, distorting the law of
competition, and raising consumer competition, all of which have more severe repercussions that
directly interfere with both the regulation and the regular operation of the market. Google's legal
representatives countered that it only seeks to provide the best results to users searching online
and that users are free to use other easy-to-use search engines without any coercion.
It is a fact that Google consistently ranks high in opinion polls about user trust, despite a growing
awareness of the risks associated with privacy in the digital space. After the lawsuit was filed, 17
Google denied all of the DOJ's allegations, emphasizing that Google's large share of the search
market was due to user choice and trust. Google says users can completely understand what
antitrust laws target to help create a healthier and fairer competitive environment. To do this, the
DOJ sues Amazon, Facebook, or Apple. It is quite possible in the near future.
2. Nguyễn Hoàng Mỹ Anh
It is true that in such a long-running controversy, people seldom reach a total agreement whether
Google is a monopoly or not. I strongly believe it is a monopoly based on its dominant position
in search, advertising and mobile operating systems. Some people claim that Google is not a
monopoly because a company is only called a monopoly when the business’s product controls an
entire sector of the economy, there is little or no competition and customers are forced to buy the
particular goods or service from the one company meanwhile there are still firms competing with
Google. This might be true at some point but monopoly also means that a firm with a significant
share of the market share in an industry and Google’s search engine is the one that accounted for
86–96% of the market share worldwide. In 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016, with a valuation of $133
billion, Interbrand's annual Best Global Brands study ranked Google as the second most valuable
brand in the world (behind Apple Inc.). Besides the most visited website worldwide-
Google.com, other Google products like YouTube and Blogger are among the top 100 most
popular websites. One of the most important factors that leads Google to have little competitors
is its convenience in accessing online information. To develop such a time-saving searching
engine, Google has managed to build a complex codebase which includes more than 2 billion
lines of code and these codes are copied as well as updated regularly across Google's 10 data
centers. Google engineers make 25,000 changes to the code per day, and on a weekly basis 18
change about 15 million lines of code across 250,000 files. Hardly had any other firms have
enough knowledgeable workers, especially engineers to establish a similar complex codebase to catch up with google.
3. Vương Quốc Thái
Monopoly is a firm or entity that can dictate everything, the price, the quantity, and the quality. It
means that there is just one seller in the market. In the past, Google and Microsoft might have
been part of my childhood and so were many people's childhood. After some research about
Google and monopoly's lectures, I find it a little interesting that approximately more than 80% of
the world's mobile devices, like smartphones, are run by Android today. Moreover, I found out
that Google forced those who made these devices to pre-install Google apps like Chrome,
Google Search, which means that they are set as one of the default apps whenever we buy a
smartphone. This makes it extremely difficult for competing apps to gain attraction. In fact,
Google is very convenient; has a friendly interface for most users; and is capable of answering
nearly all of the questions people can imagine. Even if we want to search for information about
something, we immediately think of using Google. However, it shouldn’t have been long-lasting
since Google eventually tried to manipulate our emotions and behaviors. In 2017, Google search
engine had around 90% of market share in Europe. The European commission claimed that
Google abused its dominance in the search market by giving its comparison shopping services. It
so far has been so convenient when we search for something, the comparison shopping services
gives us a list of respective products at the top of the page in order to gain more attraction. This
made chances more difficult, even impossible for the other opponents to compete with the giant
“Google”. In addition, Google attempts to collect our personal data every time we search using 19