I personally agree with you. I also note Google is better at search than the Australian PM - I'd rather not have the Australian parliament forming an opinion on the order of my search results.

However, the monopoly argument would probably be that they are using their superior search engine to hinder competitors in other markets - eg, pushing Chrome/Gmail/Android.

> I'd rather not have the Australian parliament forming an opinion on the order of my search results.

It's sad to hear such opinions about trusting "corporates more than democracy" ...

Given Australian parliaments opinion on encryption and environmental issues I think he's right to not trust them on this....

Then who should they trust? Once people start losing faith in democracy then it's a very slippery slope - everyone needs reminding that democracy isn't just voting, it's your right to speak, organise and protest for change.

Nothing makes me lose faith in democracy faster than when eligible voters uncritically defend government as better than "corporates" because who else should we trust? This only reminds me that democracy isn't about trusting the government, it's about holding the government to account and refusing to give them unearned trust when they do stupid shit like this.

When it comes trusting corporates vs government the choice is actually quite clear - if they have faith in democracy then they know the government is accountable to them, then obviously they can only trust them more. You are right though that a healthy distrust of the government in power is essential for a healthy democracy.

Spot on. We have a direct ability to not just vote but also run for office in Australia. Even if you live in a safe electorate your senate vote certainly matters. Australian governance isn't perfect but it basically works, and Australia objecitvely has succeeded as a result, even when compared against nations with similar contexts e.g. Argentina.

Foreign-owned corporations are in no way subject to Australian citizens other than commercial motives. I don't blame them for that, but I support my government's desires to regular them on my behalf.

When people feel no need to click away, they don't, and stick with the default, and thus Google has a monopoly. A monopoly doesn't mean lock in or that consumers can't switch. A monopoly means domination or near total control of a market. And if Google leaves the Australian search market for others, someone else will probably end up with that monopoly depending on what Chrome's search, Android's search and iPhone search does.

I mean, on one hand I agree with you (I found it pretty easy to not use Google Search). But I think my point is that if this was true for everyone, then we would not really be newsworthy that the PM thinks people can use Bing instead....

One technical aspect to consider is the number of devices/applications where Google is the default search. Does Australia have a plan to force a different default if Google shuts off Search? How would that affect contracts that Google has with other companies (e.g. Apple) to make its Search default?

Not everyone is technically literate enough to know how to change their browser's default search engine. Heck, some people don't know there are other ways to search the internet besides google.com....

I think newsworthiness is a poor proxy for relevance or legal standing.

I assume smartphone companies have an incentive to just switch, given that I don't think Apple et al want to leave their users without a search engine by default. They'll probably just switch over to Bing as well.

Other options are available and are good enough BUT people aren't using those other options. I mean an average guy doesn't even know about DDG and some educated guys do know about Bing but don't bother to use it. In real world, Google is synonymous with search.

I don't have the data available right now but I believe more than 70% Aussies are using Google. That is almost a monopoly.

>Other options are available and are good enough BUT people aren't using those other option

People choosing to not use other options that are easily available doesn't seem like something that should qualify Google as a monopoly that needs to be broken up (am not a lawyer, just a disclaimer).

Like, what is Google supposed to do here? Make their own search engine worse, so that users are incentivized to switch? Show people ads, recommending them to use competing search engines?

Mind you, I am not alleging that Google is not a monopoly or that it shouldn't be broken up. There could be other things that could qualify them for that, like bundling of Google Search as the default search engine with Chrome, semi-mandatory nature of Play Store on android just to be able to use google apps, etc.

However, just the sheer fact alone that most people prefer to use Google search (when there are plenty of easily available alternatives out there that the general public isn't willing to look into) shouldn't be valid grounds for an anti-monopoly lawsuit.

> what is Google supposed to do here?

We've seen this with MS already. Install Chrome - get either a random search engine assigned, or a randomised-order choice box.

Not arguing with you about this one, because I am trying to understand what you meant by "seen this with MS already" first. What did MS do? Asking because when you open the new Microsoft Edge browser, Bing is the default search engine.

I mean the browser antitrust case that forced IE alternatives years ago: https://www.news.com.au/technology/microsoft-windows-forced-...

This could be applied to the default search engine in Chrome (since it's Google owned as well)

I read the article in your link with the ruling regarding IE. All Microsoft had to do as the result was to offer a default browser choice screen during the installation experience for Windows OS (with IE still being there), and only in select 27 EU countries + 3 Scandinavian countries.

And on top of that, they don't have to do it anymore either, and MSFT is able to have (and actually does have) IE set as the default browser in EU again since late 2014 [0]. Which eventually transformed into Edge as the default browser, but you get the idea.

0.https://www.yahoo.com/news/weather/microsoft-no-longer-needs...