Sundar Pichai acknowledges Google search default deals were ‘very valuable’

Sundar Pichai admitted that agreements allowing Google’s search engine to be the default for smartphones and web browsers could be “very valuable” as Alphabet CEO took the witness stand at the largest monopoly case in 25 years.

Pichai said to the court that the deals his company made with technology companies, smartphone makers, and mobile telecoms companies were worth billions every year when “done right”. . . Can make a Difference”.

He said: “There are scenarios in which defaults can be very valuable” and that users will also benefit.

The US government accused Google illegally maintaining its monopoly through agreements that guarantee the search engine’s prominent placement on smartphones and web browsers. The group denies wrongdoing and argues that it faces tough competition, as well as the fact that its market share comes from the quality of its product which consumers use.

The Department of Justice had previously stated that Google spent upwards of 10bn per year on default contracts, but in testimony on Friday a top executive revealed that the group paid a total of $26.3bn in 2021 for such deals.

Pichai’s testimony is the most publicized witness in the landmark case, which entered its seventh week after Microsoft Chief Executive Satya Nadella gave his testimony at the beginning of this month.

Microsoft is the leading tech company in the trial, challenging Google’s dominance of internet search through its Bing engine. Nadella stated that Google’s default agreements make arguments about users having a choice of search “bogus” in his testimony.

Prosecutors said Google used the same practices it had criticised in the early 2000s when Microsoft did so. Meagan Belshaw, a DoJ lawyer, cited on Monday an email from Google that was sent in 2000 as Microsoft prepared to launch a brand new version of the Internet Explorer browser. Google had threatened legal action, claiming that Microsoft’s default search engine in the new Internet Explorer browser would prevent users from making a choice.

Google does not allow its partners to ask users to choose their default search engine under other agreements that make Google the default engine for queries in which Google shares revenue.

Pichai claimed that Microsoft was “honoring” the user’s preference at the time because Internet Explorer default settings were hidden. He claimed that Microsoft made efforts to make it difficult for users to switch default browsers and search engines “always”, beyond the incident in the 2000s. Pichai said that Google doesn’t prohibit users from choosing their default browser or search engine, but “if you are doing commercial deals, we pay for enhanced promotional”. Microsoft did not respond immediately to a comment request.

Bellshaw cites an email sent by Google employees in 2008, telling their group’s staff that instant messaging was to be “off-the-record” as the company “was undergoing several significant legal and regulating matters”.

Federal prosecutors claim that Google destroyed documents and hid evidence for years. The company said it had provided more than five million documents in the case, and Pichai said on Monday that employees’ potential humor, for example, “may have been misconstrued”.

This is the biggest antitrust case that has been brought against Big Tech, since the DoJ in 1990 accused Microsoft of trying to crush Netscape by using its Windows dominance. The ruling of a judge ordering the break-up Microsoft was overturned by an appeal.