The recent ruling that labels Google as an illegal monopoly not only questions the nature of competition but also disrupts consumer choice and innovation.
Judge Mehta's decision reinforces a belief that 'big is inherently bad,' straying from previous jurisprudence that focused on consumer welfare and innovation.
The judgment risks setting a precedent that complicates market leadership, indicating a troubling shift in U.S. competition policy that may stifle successful companies.
The DOJ's pursuit of remedies against Google may symbolize an extreme stance of government intervention that could disrupt consumer benefits from innovative firms.
Collection
[
|
...
]