This paper focuses on Google, a US-based internet company whose dominance on the internet has been considered as violation or manipulation of the rights of competition, which has antitrust suspicions. It has been targeted by the US Federal Trade Commission’s investigation in order to create liberty for other competitors and/or businesses and enable them join the market. In the current business environment, the existence of both monopolists and oligopolists can be regarded as sources of societal risks and/or benefits (McConell, Brue & Flynn, 2012). These considerations are dependent on the outcome of the transaction i.e. it can negative or positive. This is because business interactions entail dealings between people and/or companies guided by legal agreements.
It is worth noting that the most dominant aspects that connect small and large companies in the market are the financial transactions. However, considering the current trend, things are likely to change for online-based search engines especially Google. For a long time, Google has remained the greatest online-based search engine in the market because of its capacities to provide great extents of reliability in respect to any form of research (Department of Defense, 2009). Being the most dominant online search engine, it has the capacity to reveal any information that world needs to know, because it provides a platform for millions of people to interact. However, this reliability does not prevent clients from dissatisfaction especially where things do not happen as expected, and it is at this point that antitrust considerations become valid. This is because the key objective of antitrust regulations is to ensure that there is fair competition in the market (Patterson, 2013). In this case becomes a victim of antitrust when clients using its search engine encounter sad experiences.
It is worth noting that the Antitrust Policy is a composition of antitrust laws as well as actions of the government meant for preventing monopolistic behavior and promote competition in the market. In January 2013, was in investigated by the US Federal Trade Commission for being involved in antitrust behavior by creating barriers to the competitors who had an interest in the internet market (Patterson, 2013). The antitrust probe was not entirely pecuniary; instead, it was meant to collect enough against Google’s behavior that had violated the rights of other people. The investigation was conducted in respect to Section 5 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, a statute, which the Congress passed in 1890 to defend unreasonable control of interstate commerce by some companies (Eastabrook, 1984).
In most cases, businesses get involved in monopolistic practices to create barriers to other businesses that would like to join the market. In such cases, such businesses have been referred to as price makers. In this in respect to Clayton Act, a federal act whose amendment happened in 1914 for the purpose of fixing prices (McConell et al., 2012). For instance, Yahoo is supposed to be Google’s perfect competitor; but Google, through its practices, prevents the development of any other monopolies making the public to suffer. In this case, the concern of the Federal Government is based on the fact that Google manipulates search results to prevent competition.
It is, therefore, worth noting that oligopolies and monopolies can be beneficial to the society just like they can create risks to it. Therefore, both negative and positive business experiences will elucidate varying experiences. In some cases, monopolies such as electrical power supply are beneficial to the society. It is, therefore, significant for businesses to regard reaction of its competitors to the prices of its commodities.