57
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

The U.S. Department of Justice is ramping up its case against Google's alleged monopoly, suggesting the government could eventually force the company to sell its widely-used Chrome browser. The move is part of the DoJ's push to challenge Google's hold over the digital advertising and search engine markets.

The Justice Department's latest legal action accuses Google of engaging in anticompetitive behavior by unfairly using its dominance in search and advertising to prop up its other services, most notably Chrome. The government argues that Google's browser and vast data ecosystem have given the company an outsized advantage over competitors, stifling innovation and harming consumers. By bundling Chrome with its Android operating system, Google has built an extensive network that could limit consumer choice and make it difficult for smaller firms to compete.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 1 week ago

the doj doesn't care about monopolies; the doj just wants to punish people who don't push fascist agendas.

[-] RightEdofer@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

Google’s ad network and YouTube are pushing the agenda more than pretty much everyone.

[-] Xanza@lemm.ee 0 points 1 week ago

They're an open platform. Anyone can buy ad time on their platforms. It has nothing to do with Google and everything to do with people buying ad time.

If you're going to be pissed, then be pissed. Just be right.

[-] PreciousPig@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago

"Guns don't kill people, people do!" No structural issues here to see, please proceed /s

[-] Xanza@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

More like, if you sell a gun and follow the law, you're not responsible if the person you sold the gun to murders someone...

They're an ad agency. They sell ad space. If "anti-abortion" people buy ads, that doesn't mean that Google is pushing anti-abortion. How anyone could think like that is frankly the epitome of stupidity.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 weeks ago

I guess Google didn’t bribe hard enough

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 weeks ago

There are still Trump critics on YouTube.

[-] Ulrich@feddit.org 3 points 2 weeks ago

It's not done yet. I highly doubt it ever will be either.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

Justice Department is 100% lobbing this over to JD Vance's buddy Peter Thiel who's going to enshittify it even further and turn it with its massive install base into a tool for techno-fascism.

[-] biofaust@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I must say that, as a European using a Firefox fork for my daily browsing while waiting for Ladybird, I don't see that outcome as completely negative: Google, somehow, in America has kept a completely unjustified good vibes feeling surrounding itself, while Thiel is much more evil in the public eye.

If Chrome is associated with him in anyway it can become a more lucid image of itself.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I really don't think this is true. It might push some politically engaged users to Firefox, but unlike Musk, most people don't know who Thiel is, and as long as he keeps it that way, nobody will care.

[-] biofaust@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

That's when we come onto the scene.

I am continuously "translating" news and opinions from here on LinkedIn. Already got banned from a professional Slack that contains most people in my industry for saying in a private conversation that I like watermelon.

Not gonna stop. People are not politically inclined because we kept our knowledge to ourselves for too long.

[-] tomenzgg@midwest.social 0 points 1 week ago

For a second, I read your fruit predilection literally and was like, "Is…watermelon controversial, now? Are they [the people who banned you] cartoonishly racist?"

I follow you, now; sucks but expected…

[-] nodiratime@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I still don't get it, can you clue me in?

[-] green@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Acceleration-ism does not work.

If the USA has not taught you this, after this reckless takeover, nothing will save you.

The more likely outcome is for Chrome to become a North Korea RedStar equivalent, where you cannot freely access the internet without Chrome. And if you visit a resource with wrongspeak, the resource will have all its finances taken away (see the legislation surrounding section 230); with you being sent to El Salvador.

[-] Fuhgeddaboutit@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)
[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago

Please, do it! That's going to eviscerate Chrome's userbase and push these Chromium browsers to fork so fast it'll make his head spin.

[-] pivot_root@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

You're putting way too much faith in the typical consumer. Enshittifying Chrome even more would piss its users off, but inertia and its market dominance would keep most of them continuing to use it while complaining about how bad it is.

Remember: It took 8 years for Chrome to drag Internet Explorer to the point where less than 10% of people actually used it. And that's with Firefox already being a competitor to it for years.

[-] InFerNo@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 week ago

Microsoft Chrome

Meta Chrome

Amazon Chrome

Apple Chrome

Sell to who though

[-] brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago

X Chrome

Ughhhhhhh

[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

ByteDance shell company Chrome.

[-] Geodad@lemm.ee 7 points 1 week ago

Google should do the power play and completely open source the browser.

[-] madis@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

But Chrome is already just Chromium with some binary blobs. Chromium itself even has sync and Google services at this point.

Besides, what would that change in regards to who develops it?

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Why, what, is there something different about the Google guy?

[-] einlander@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Look at all their lips. See how they look like they are ready to kiss or suck something? Now look at Pichai. Just smiling instead of getting ready to receive a load. He bent the knee, but not far enough.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, that's probably the difference

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] fuzzywombat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Which tech company would buy Chrome from Google? I just can't think of a single tech company that could be an improvement over Google owning Chrome.

  • Amazon

  • Apple

  • Meta

  • Microsoft

  • Oracle

What about media companies? I don't see consumers benefiting from this.

  • Comcast

  • Disney

  • Netflix

  • Viacom

What about telecom? I still don't see consumers benefiting from this.

  • AT&T

  • T-Mobile

  • Verizon

What about foreign companies? Will they be even allowed to buy Chrome? I'm not sure.

  • LG

  • Philips

  • Samsung

  • Sony

The more I think about it, this won't end well.

[-] rippersnapper@lemm.ee 3 points 1 week ago

Sell it to Canonical

[-] rhadamanth_nemes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Sell it to IBM so they can end all support lol

[-] madis@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Of those companies, Apple seems like the best option due to their business goals (privacy). Though I am not fully sure why they'd want to as they already have a browser with a relative market share dominance and ecosystem.

Realistically, it would make sense to see Microsoft try again, it would instantly get 70% of the world to use "Edge", so their goals are met. Chrome already has the modern web standards, so it might just mean slower progression of the web in the future.

[-] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Apples business isn't privacy. Apples business is selling privacy.

[-] madis@lemm.ee 2 points 1 week ago

I don't disagree, it's more of a matter of least evil.

[-] jackyard@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Chromium is already there and companies like Microsoft have their own forks so... Yeah I think there's no point of buying Chrome.

[-] rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's the most popular web browser in the world. Direct access to the browser windows and browsing data of the majority of Internet users would be the point.

[-] barkingspiders@infosec.pub 2 points 2 weeks ago

I think this is good news which seems hard to believe right now. I'm sure someone will find a way to make this terrible but on it's face we are watching an important anti-trust ruling take place. Google's monopoly on the browser is dangerous and unhealthy. Taking it away from them is absolutely the right thing to do. Who inherits the power over the single browser used by most of the world remains to be seen though.

[-] kibiz0r@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

Who inherits the power over the single browser used by most of the world remains to be seen though.

Probably Musk or Thiel.

[-] amorpheus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago
[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Solution: Create an open source foundation, cram the board with Google employees

[-] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It would be better to not allow Google to have a major stake in the control of the Chromium project itself. Same for Android, force them to spin AOSP off into a nonprofit or sell it to EFF or something and forbid them from having a huge stake in it.

Let them use it for their own products, but remove their financial influence over the underlying software.

[-] boughtmysoul@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

A direct “donation” to Trump would instantly fix this.

[-] WormFood@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

the browser itself doesn't matter. Google have had 10 years to do what they want with the specs for html, CSS and JavaScript, to define everything from browser extension APIs to the http protocol itself. they have won. not only have they spent a decade architecting the web in a way that mostly benefits them, they have made those specifications so bloated and complicated that nobody can develop a competitor from scratch. it took years to undo the damage wrought by ie6's stagnation but this is different. this shit can't be undone. it's fucked forever

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago

I somehow don't believe this is going to happen. But if it does, sell it to Mozilla?

[-] Ledericas@lemm.ee 0 points 1 week ago

mozilla doesnt have money, they are so desperate now, they are lowkey selling some data.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2025
57 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

68306 readers
2960 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS