> Google is going to appeal, because it wants to have the original monopolization finding overturned. But AAG Gail Slater and Colorado State AG Phil Weiser both are making mild noises about a possible cross-appeal of the weak remedy, saying publicly they wonder whether Mehta’s solution “goes far enough.” Since there are many errors of law in Mehta’s decision, such a cross-appeal might work.
For making such a bizarre and error-riddled decision (finding Google guilty of illegal monopoly, then refusing to apply effective remedies because they might compromise Google's monopoly), Amit Mehta should be investigated for conflicts of interest, and perhaps disbarred.
For making such a bizarre and error-riddled decision (finding Google guilty of illegal monopoly, then refusing to apply effective remedies because they might compromise Google's monopoly), Amit Mehta should be investigated for conflicts of interest, and perhaps disbarred.