Washington, D.C. (11/18/2024) – The Department of Justice (DOJ) is expected to file its finalized proposal for remedies in the Google v. United States case this week. The government’s anticipated filing is set to come just a month after the DOJ released an initial, high-level remedy framework, which included a number of radical proposals that experts warn threaten to chill American innovation and harm U.S. consumers and small businesses.
Notably, Congressman Lou Correa, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust, cautioned that any remedies for this case must “incorporate the consequences on California and American workers, consumers, developers, startups, and the American economy.”
In a statement, Correa encouraged the court to “ensure that workers and consumers are not harmed while incentives to innovate that enable dynamic and disruptive new products and ideas continue to thrive.”
The Computer & Communications Industry Association’s President and CEO Matt Schruershas pointed out that the DOJ’s initial proposed remedies would “reshape numerous industries and products, which would harm consumers and innovation in these dynamic markets.”
Additionally, following the government’s release of its proposed framework, CCIA Chief Economist Trevor Wagenerdissected the potential remedies, describing how some of the government’s most heavy-handed proposals would “increase both the size of new costs and the expected share of those cost increases passed on to consumers, harming consumer welfare considerably.”
Many additional experts have warned of the negative impact the government’s initial ideas would have on U.S. competitiveness, consumers, and small businesses:
“When considering the impact of the more extreme remedies, there is a long list of possible unintended consequences.
“This includes – but is certainly not limited to – driving up costs for consumers & small businesses, limiting developers’ ability to innovate, stifling competition, restricting choices in the market, and compromising the security of popular, widely-used products…(as well as) broader implications for American tech’s ability to innovate and compete on the global stage…
“In the short-term, the court’s decision may be intended to only affect Google, but the reality is that the remedies for this case have the potential to significantly impact consumers and the broader tech sector for years to come.”
“Google is one of America’s most admired companies, driving innovation and job creation. The DOJ needs to carefully consider the broader impact of their decisions on workers, consumers, and American competitiveness.“
“[The government’s], proposals if approved, will make the internet less safe for Americans immediately. As or more concerning, the remedies will kneecap AI development and undermine broader U.S. national interests, potentially compelling foreign competitors’ access to Google’s intellectual property and compromising the privacy and security of U.S. citizens. Leaving aside our concerns about Judge Mehta’s ruling on the merits, DOJ’s proposed remedies grossly overreach.”
Adam Kovacevich, Chamber of Progress:
“The Justice Department is throwing remedy spaghetti at the wall. It might score some headlines, but it’s a legal non-starter. The Microsoft case established 25 years ago that antitrust remedies must be narrowly tailored to the offending conduct. The Justice Department is throwing out remedies that go far beyond the judge’s ruling, and history tells us that broad remedies won’t survive the appeals process.”
The Don’t Break What Works campaign is powered by the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA). Learn more here.