Sunder Pachai, the chief executive officer of the alphabet, told a judge who found that Google illegally monopolizes the online search that the Department of Justice would propose to distribute search data with rivals a “de facto” of the company’s search engine.
If Google needed to share both information about how to enter its search data and its results, rivals testified on Wednesday that “every aspect of our technology can change”.
“The proposal for data sharing is still far -reaching, so unusual,” said Pachai. He said that during 25 years of research, it looks like a “distribution of search rights” and its entire intellectual property and technology.
During the testimony in the Federal Court in Washington, Pachai stressed that a package of the government’s dissenting treatment is high and will damage the Google market’s ability to compete in the market. He said that “continuing investment in treatment and development will make it impossible for treatment and development.” “It will have many unannounced results.”
‘Surely Slow Raw’
The Department of Justice’s proposal is much wider than the recent European Gatekeeper Law, the Digital Markets Act, in which Google needs to share some data with rival search engines.
He said the law was “significantly tight”, but because of this, the company delayed the introduction of some innovations to the European Union. “When we are eligible to launch features in Europe, surely it is slow,” he said.
The pitch was called to testify as part of a three -week trial, which aims to restore Google competition online after the decision by US District Judge Amit Mehta last year that Tech Dev has maintained monopoly in the market illegally. The Department of Justice Wrapped his case Tuesday afternoon and the company is now providing its evidence and testimony.
The government wants Google to divide itself with its Chrome browser, give some search data to competitors, and stop paying special positions on other apps and devices. It has also asked that Mehta increased the ban on Google’s AI products, including its AI Assistant Gemini, which the government says was sought with the help of the company’s illegal monopoly.
Google has confronted that the government’s proposal will damage US consumers and the economy, and that the US technical leadership will weaken.
Pachai also pushed back another aspect of the government’s proposed treatment, which would prevent the company from paying smartphone makers or browsers for a default space. He said these payments help browsers such as Mozilla and Smartphone makers to support the Android ecosystem.
“If Google is able to continue paying for defaults, another competitor can potentially pay as much as Google is able to pay?” Mehta asked.
Both Microsoft and the Open AI have been able to eliminate Google on some deals with publishers for the content used in the AI system, Pachai said. He said, Openi also contracted with Apple to present his chat GPT technology on the iPhone. Hope to sign an agreement This year to offer your AI chat boot on the iPhone.
Testify for the third time
The fifty has been testifying for the third time for the third time, as Google’s long -run anti -trust cases have injured their route through the courts. At the end of 2023, More than two short weeksTech Executive had to axa from Mehta’s room court in Washington, Defending Google in the first stage Of the Justice Department’s search monopoly case, one in San Francisco where one judge has charged Foretenite The epic play that Google Play had illegally dominated the mobile app market.
In both of these cases, as well as one -third where the pitch did not testify – about it Google dominates online advertising technology markets – Google was found to be engaged in anti -anti -treatment. This shows that the tech company has examined unprecedented distrust in the United States in recent years to control the key aspects of the world online.
The 52 -year -old Pachi has spent the majority of his career on Google, which began in 2004 as a product manager and develops to become the company’s CEO in 2015. It has played a number of roles, including the company’s Android strategy, and playing a key role in the development of Chrome.
The lawyer pushed the pitch
During the scrutiny, DOJ’s lawyer Veronica Oneema pushed the pitch to the idea that there is no way to find out who will be the ultimate buyer for the Chrome browser-and thus the buyer will not be able to talk about the buyer’s internal security measures. Pachai said that his intimate knowledge about Chrome and his security made him eligible to give his opinion.
He replied, “I personally made Chrome defects with the security team.”
Under questioning, he acknowledged that no company is perfect for addressing confidentiality concerns and it would be impossible for Google to solve the problems of cybersecurity itself.
As was the case during his first hearing in the Federal Court for the initial phase of the search monopoly case of the Department of Justice, the pitch was dressed in a dark suit and he decided to stand instead of sitting instead of testifying. On Tuesday afternoon, the company’s lawyers met with a cybercruscript expert, Google employee Heather Edkins, was the second Google witness. Edkins testified that Google’s security affiliation made him a good chrome standard, as it described the methods that the company worked to thwart the malicious attacks of bad actors targeting the browser.
Mehta has said that he wants to decide to remove the damage caused by Google’s dominance until August. But whatever he decides, Google will wait a year long to affect any change. After hearing the treatment, the company is expected to appeal and will likely take the case to the US Supreme Court.
(This story has not been edited by the NDTV staff and has been made auto from the Syndicate Fed.)
