In a significant ruling, a US federal district court judge declared Google as a monopolist this week. The decision comes after years of speculation regarding the company's dominant position in the market. Google's journey from a humble startup to an internet overlord seemed unfathomable back in 1999, but today, it is valued at trillions of dollars and holds a staggering 90 percent global share in internet search.

Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the cofounders of Google, were known for shying away from the media and having trust issues with people. In the early stages of the company, they embarked on a press tour in 1999 to highlight their revolutionary search engine. However, many top editors of renowned publications were skeptical of their potential. Nevertheless, their perseverance paid off, and Google eventually became an integral part of our daily lives.

Fast forward to the present day, Google, now known as Alphabet, holds immense power in the digital realm. However, this week's ruling by US federal district court judge Amit P. Mehta sheds light on Google's alleged violation of antitrust laws. In a comprehensive 286-page decision, Mehta concluded that Google is a monopolist and behaved accordingly to maintain its dominance. The ruling is based on extensive documentation, exhibits, and a nine-week trial, signaling a significant setback for the tech giant.

Furthermore, this ruling might not be the end of Google's legal battles. The company now faces yet another trial to determine whether it is a monopolist in the digital advertising sphere. The irony is not lost, as Google's founders once expressed their disdain for ads, believing that advertising-backed search engines would favor advertisers over consumer needs. However, the evolution of the company's business model has placed it in the crosshairs of antitrust scrutiny.

The rise of Google to its current behemoth status was not an improbable outcome in the digital age. The winner-takes-all nature of the internet has paved the way for young upstarts to challenge established industry leaders. Larry and Sergey join the ranks of visionaries such as Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, and Mark Zuckerberg, who defied industry giants and championed their groundbreaking ideas.

However, as these once underdogs became industry giants themselves, the trajectory resembled the myth of Icarus. Empowered by the network effects of the internet, these tech behemoths came dangerously close to the sun, driven by their own success and mistaking their rise for their own genius.

Judge Mehta's ruling specifically focuses on Google's practice of investing billions of dollars for default placement in Apple and Mozilla browsers' address fields. While Google argued that such preferential treatment was due to its superior product, the judge pointed out that Google's superiority was perpetuated by its ability to collect vast amounts of data, which its competitors cannot match. This advantage allows Google to constantly improve its search engine, giving it an unfair advantage over rivals.

While it is legal to attain a monopoly through superior products or innovation, the judge argues that actions that maintain a monopoly by restricting competition are illegal. Google's alleged violations of antitrust laws highlight the need for increased scrutiny and regulation in the digital sphere.

As the legal proceedings continue, the implications of the ruling will reverberate throughout the tech industry. It serves as a reminder that even the most influential companies must be held accountable to ensure fair competition and protect the interests of consumers.

Disclaimer: The information in the article is based on the provided text and does not reflect any personal opinions or additional sources.