Google is embroiled in a historic antitrust trial, accused of manipulating the internet search arena to stifle competition. 

This high-stakes legal battle, initiated by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and a coalition of state attorneys-general, marks the most significant antitrust case in the US in 25 years. 

Google, which controls nearly 90 per cent of the global internet search market, is fighting fiercely to maintain its dominant position.

The crux of the matter, as articulated by the DOJ's lead litigator, Kenneth Dintzer, is whether Google's stranglehold on the internet will ever face genuine competition. 

The DOJ contends that Google has engaged in underhanded tactics, such as securing deals to have its search engine as the default option on various devices, making it exceedingly arduous for competitors to gain a foothold.

This legal skirmish, initiated in 2020, portrays Google as the “gatekeeper of the internet” and a monopolistic force. 

The DOJ notes that Google shells out over $10 billion annually for these privileged default positions on web browsers like Apple's Safari and Mozilla's Firefox.

Furthermore, Google's ubiquitous search engine processes billions of daily searches, which it exploits to sharpen its competitive edge and obstruct rivals. 

An internal Google document reportedly dubs its deals with device manufacturers and telecom companies an ‘Achilles Heel’ for rival search engines.

To compound matters, Google stands accused of obstructing Apple from developing its own search engine. 

Dintzer contends that Google intentionally deleted documents to conceal evidence and shield others under attorney-client privilege, asserting that they “destroyed documents for years” to manipulate the narrative.

In its defence, Google claims its dominance stems from superior product quality and argues users can easily switch their default search engine. 

The company rejects the notion that it stifles competition, highlighting competitors like Microsoft's Bing, along with social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Reddit.

In a pre-trial statement, Kent Walker, Google's President of Global Affairs, defended the company's practices as reflective of choices made by device makers based on consumer preferences and service quality. Google contends that the quality of its products, not the quantity of contracts, underpins its success.

The trial has already seen key witnesses, including Google's chief economist Hal Varian and former Google employee Chris Barton, who affirmed the company's strategy to secure default search engine status on mobile devices. 

Antonio Rangel, a behavioural economist, shed light on the hurdles consumers face when trying to switch default search engines.

The trial's timeline is estimated at 10 weeks, with a ruling expected in early 2024. 

Should Google be found guilty, remedies may include discontinuing illegal practices or divesting assets.

 One potential outcome is forcing Google to cease payments to companies like Apple for default search engine status, potentially impacting Alphabet's revenue.

This trial has broader implications for the tech industry, reminiscent of the 1998 Microsoft antitrust case. 

With bipartisan support for the lawsuit and other tech giants like Meta and Amazon also under scrutiny, it could reshape the regulatory landscape for Big Tech in Washington.