🧑⚖️ REGULATION

Alphabet Spells Monopoly

The battle against Google rages on, with a one-two punch for the Internet giant.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge James Donato in San Francisco ordered the tech behemoth to overhaul its Android app business citing anti-competitive behavior.

According to Reuters, "for three years beginning in November, Google under the order must allow Android users to download rival app platforms and use competing in-app payment methods, and it cannot pay device makers to preinstall its app store Play."

The ruling comes in response to a case brought by "Fortnite"-maker Epic Games in 2020, alleging Google was unfairly monopolizing in-app payments and distribution in the Google Play store.

The judge's ruling to open the Play store isn't a free-for-all, however. As The Verge writes:

The injunction says that Google can “take reasonable measures” that are “strictly necessary and narrowly tailored” and are “comparable” to how it currently polices the Google Play Store. Google will be able to charge a fee for that policing, too. Epic has repeatedly argued that Google should not be able to deter third-party app stores through policing, so it’s likely Epic and Google will keep butting heads over this.

In a statement following the order, Google argued that the changes "will cause a range of unintended consequences that will harm American consumers, developers and device makers."

Meanwhile, Epic CEO Tim Sweeney called the ruling a "victory" on X, and announced an Epic Games Store coming in 2025 to compete with the Play story "without Google's scare screens and Google's 30% app tax".

Breakup

The second hit to Google came on Tuesday when the DOJ made its recommended remedies to the company's monopolistic search engine business practices. The filing recommends “considering behavioral and structural remedies that would prevent Google from using products such as Chrome, Play, and Android to advantage Google search and Google search-related products and features — including emerging search access points and features, such as artificial intelligence — over rivals or new entrants.” Furthermore, the Justice Department has indicated that splitting up Alphabet is not off the table.

In a response to the DOJ's recommendations, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, wrote in a blog post that "the government seems to be pursuing a sweeping agenda that will impact numerous industries and products, with significant unintended consequences for consumers, businesses, and American competitiveness." She also notes that spinning the Chrome (Google's browser) and Android divisions off the company would break them, "change their business models, raise the cost of devices, and undermine Android and Google Play in their robust competition with Apple’s iPhone and App Store."

Verdict

The DOJ has been pursuing this sweeping investigation of Alphabet for 5 years now. That is to say, their monopoly case(s!) clearly have merit. Is that to say that breaking up Alphabet is the best course of action? That's unclear. It's hard to imagine the future of the Internet without a unified Google, but it's possible.

🤳 SOCIAL MEDIA

Tiktok Addiction

Earlier this week, 13 states and the District of Columbia all filed suit independently against social media giant TikTok. The central claim of the cases was that the app-maker explicitly designed the social media platform to be addictive to teens.

“TikTok intentionally targets children because they know kids do not yet have the defenses or capacity to create healthy boundaries around addictive content,” Rob Bonta, Attorney General of California, where TikTok is headquartered, said in statement. “TikTok must be held accountable for the harms it created in taking away the time — and childhoods — of American children.”

Beyond addiction, the suits claim that the heavy usage by teens of the app leads to psychological and emotional harm. Letitia James, Attorney General of New York, singled out so-called "beauty filters" which employ AI to alter a user's face, in a statement: “Beauty filters have been especially harmful to young girls. …Beauty filters can cause body image issues and encourage eating disorders, body dysmorphia, and other health-related problems.”

As NPR adds, in its filing, the District of Columbia also pointed to a kind of content-trapping of teens. The lawsuit claims that these online bubbles “bombard them with precisely the kinds of content that TikTok claims not to allow, including videos about weight-loss, body-image, and self-harm content.”

For its part, TikTok has refuted the claims and said it is proud of the "robust" safeguards it employs to protect teens. In a statement, Alex Haurek, a spokesperson for the company, said TikTok “strongly disagree[s] with these claims, many of which we believe to be inaccurate and misleading. We’re proud of and remain deeply committed to the work we’ve done to protect teens and we will continue to update and improve our product.” As The Verge notes, he added that the social media platform has spent the last two years working with state AGs “and it is incredibly disappointing they have taken this step rather than work with us on constructive solutions to industry-wide challenges.”

The Facebook Parallel

TikTok is not the only social media giant facing these charges. Late last year, 41 states joined together to sue Meta (Facebook's parent company) over many similar claims. The complaint reads in part that “Meta has harnessed powerful and unprecedented technologies to entice, engage, and ultimately ensnare youth and teens. Its motive is profit, and in seeking to maximize its financial gains, Meta has repeatedly misled the public about the substantial dangers of its social media platforms. …It has concealed the ways in which these platforms exploit and manipulate its most vulnerable consumers: teenagers and children.”

Much like TikTok, Meta has decried the litigation in lieu of working with states to solve these issues. "“We’re disappointed that instead of working productively with companies across the industry to create clear, age-appropriate standards for the many apps teens use, the attorneys general have chosen this path,” a statement by the company notes, writes the AP.

Verdict

With the clock ticking until the end of the Biden Administration, the crusade against Silicon Valley waged over the last few years might be in jeopardy. Moreover, as our online lives consume every corner of our culture, this may also be our final chance to build in meaningful laws and regulations.