Google General Director Sundar Pichai proves extraordinary ‘remedies’ doj would cause ‘many unintentional consequences’

Google General Director Sundar Pichai tried to convince a federal court on Wednesday that the proposed plan of the Department of Justice to disrupt his search monopoly would have “many unintentional consequences”.

Doj has asked American District Judge Ait Mehta to approve some legal remedies, including a forced deviation of Google’s Chrome internet browser and ordering the company to share data on search results and indices with rivals to increase competition.

Pichai, testifying to Google’s defense in the Federal Court of Washington, called the request for “extraordinary” data sharing and argued that this will result in a “Definator de facto” of the company’s internet search business.

“It would be irrelevant to the opposite engineer and effectively build Google searching from the outside,” Pichai said.

“If approved, remedies would make it” inevitable “for Google to invest in R&D as we have for the last two decades,” CEO added.

DOJ’s lawyers completed their case earlier this week in the historical phase of the remedies, which began on April 21 and is expected to last approximately three weeks. Mehta has already ruled last August that Google was a “monopoly” on online search and has a single discretion to determine the best way to stop its anti-reompetitive practices in the non-Jurid case.

While standing, Pichai argued that the Donj’s proposals were even wider than the act of European Union digital markets-a widespread law aimed at Internet goalkeepers that have attracted criticism by President Trump, Bloomberg reported.

Pichai also proved that Google was aiming to reach an agreement with Apple to integrate her twin chatbot he into the iPhone.

In addition to diversifying chromium and data sharing, Doj has argued that Google should be banned from paying billions for Apple and other partners to ensure that his search engine is activated as default on most smartphones.

Pichai defended those partnerships, arguing that they allowed smartphone manufacturers to support the Android software ecosystem.

Mehta appeared skeptical of this argument.

“If Google is able to continue to pay for default, how can he pay any other competitor to pay as far as Google is able to pay?” Asked Mehta at one point.

Feds have also navigated Google’s obligation to divert its ownership of the Android operating system if the starting vehicles are ineffective in addressing its monopoly.

Lawyers also warned that Google is already utilizing artificial intelligence as a “method to get in search” and said that every medicine should be “ready and not ignore what is on the horizon”.

Google’s legal team has claimed that the DON’s proposals are very extreme.

The company has said that a forced sale of Chrome and Android will “disrupt these platforms”, endangered US national security and potentially allows China to dance the US to develop it and other major technologies.

Antitrust Chief Doj Gail Slater rejected that argument in a speech outside the DC Court last week.

“You know what is dangerous? The threat that Google presents to our freedom of speech, to our freedom of thought, to liberate American digital markets. You know what is irresponsible?

Post -wire