From the New York Times, I'm Sab of another case, one from the 1990s.

Today, my colleague Steve Loor, on the influence of US v Microsoft and what lessons that case may hold for the future

of big tech today. It's Wednesday, August 14th.

Wednesday, August 14th. Steve, welcome to the show.

Steve, welcome to the show.

Nice to be here, thank you.

So Steve, we wanted to have you on the show because last week we finally

got a decision in the big case involving Google. And that was of course the case where the

Department of Justice was arguing that Google was a monopoly.

And as we now know, the judge in the case agreed.

So just to start, refresh our memories about this case.

This is the first big anti-monopoly case against a modern tech company.

There are others in the works, there's Amazon, Apple, and Meta, and those are to come.

But this is the first salvo in this standoff between the antitrust enforcers and the big tech companies.

This one was actually filed in the Trump administration but picked up with eagerness by the Biden administration.

It centers on search and the allegation here is that

Google used its monopoly power to shut off competition and control

distribution of its search engine to the disadvantage of everyone else.

Right, and the way it did that, according to the government, was by paying companies like

Apple, like Samsung, to be the default search engine on their platforms.

The DOJ of course said, this is illegal.

Google's response was, in essence, no, this is just good business these platforms want us there because we're the best and

...