Google's court filing aims to prove that its dominance in the search market is due to its superior and innovative product, not because of its monopoly share. It also dismisses DuckDuckGo’s approach to privacy as a failure, claiming it leads to trade-offs in search quality. The filing also highlights the difficulties faced by startups in building a search business to rival Google's, as demonstrated by the experiences of DuckDuckGo and Neeva. Despite these competitors, Google maintains it faces competition from specialized search providers and social media platforms.
Key takeaways:
- A court filing in the U.S. Department of Justice’s case against Google has revealed details about the competition in the search market, including the operations and revenue of Google's competitors like DuckDuckGo and Neeva.
- Despite being profitable since 2014, DuckDuckGo has been criticized for not investing in search innovation and instead focusing on returning investment to its shareholders. It also hasn't built its own comprehensive web index for organic search results.
- Neeva, a search engine startup founded by former Googlers, initially showed promise with its ad-free alternative to Google. However, it struggled to compete with free search and eventually pivoted to enterprise before being acquired by Snowflake.
- Google is arguing that it competes with a number of other products and platforms, including dedicated mobile apps, websites offering specialized search, AI, and social media. The outcome of the case, which is examining whether Google holds a monopoly in search and search advertising, is yet to be determined.