Is Google is a Monopoly? If So, Are Consumers Harmed?

Oddly enough, whether Google is, or is not, more or less a monopoly, might not matter. How does it not matter, in terms of classical antitrust thinking?

One can argue, since Google provides its services for free, that whether Google competitors are at a disadvantage or not is not the real issue. How one can prove that consumers are harmed is the issue, and one might question how consumers are harmed by Google's dominance in the search market.

For purposes of assessing whether Google in some way violates U.S. antitrust law at least, the issue is less "monopoly-like characteristics. The issue is whether Google has acquired that monopoly by nefarious or anticompetitive means, or is using that dominant position in a way that harms the market for those services.

The problem with applying that to Google is that even if you assume it has a monopoly and is being anticompetitive, it’s not at all clear how that is bad for consumers.

Whether Google is a monopoly isn’t the point