The DOJ has accused Google of encouraging employees to delete sensitive chat logs where they discussed the inner workings of the search giant’s business, including messages potentially revealing the company’s alleged anticompetitive practices and monopolistic intent in the search market.
TechSpot reports that in an ongoing legal battle, the DOJ has taken aim at Google’s document retention policy, alleging that the tech giant deliberately destroyed records that could have exposed its efforts to illegally exclude rivals and maintain dominance in the search market. The government lawyers have asked Judge Amit Mehta to issue harsh presumptions that the deleted chat logs contained evidence of anticompetitive conduct.
A Google Inc. employee marches towards City Hall during the Global Climate Strike in Seattle, Washington, U.S., on Friday, Sept. 20, 2019. Thousands of workers at Microsoft Corp. and Amazon.com Inc. walked out without their bosses’ blessings to protest rising global temperatures. Photographer: Chloe Collyer/Bloomberg
During the closing arguments on Friday, Judge Mehta expressed his disbelief at Google’s actions, stating, “Google’s document retention policy leaves a lot to be desired.”
The Justice Department has been unwavering in its approach, requesting the court to assume the worst about the undisclosed conversations. DOJ lawyer Kenneth Dintzer argued that Google failed to fulfill its obligations by informing only one plaintiff, Texas, about its chat retention practices. Dintzer asserted, “Only upon finding that the party acted with the intent to deprive another party of the information’s use in the litigation may the court presume that the lost information was unfavorable.”
In response, Google’s lawyer, Colette Connor, maintained that the DOJ has no proof that the lost chats were relevant to the case. However, the government remains steadfast in its pursuit of evidence to support its claims of Google’s alleged search engine monopoly.
Throughout the trial, DOJ lawyers have drawn parallels between Google’s case and the infamous Microsoft antitrust case from the late 1990s. They argue that Google’s distribution deals with smartphone makers, browsers, and other entities have illegally stifled competition, much like Microsoft’s actions in the past. Dintzer emphasized this point, stating that the Google case “fits like a glove” with the Microsoft precedent.
Google’s legal team, on the other hand, has vehemently denied these allegations, asserting that the company’s success is attributed to its superior search experience, in contrast to Microsoft’s forcing of an inferior product onto users.
Read more at TechSpot here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship.
