Sure, here is a rephrased version of the content to make it plagiarism-free and unique:
The presiding judge in a pivotal antitrust trial concerning Google's alleged suppression of competition and innovation suggested that it would be challenging for a substantial competitor search engine to emerge. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, in the closing arguments of the trial, questioned whether another company could accumulate the necessary resources and data to develop a search engine that could rival Google.
Mehta expressed doubt, stating, "It seems to be very, very unlikely, if not impossible, under the current market conditions." He noted the paradox of Google's significant profits in a market where no major competitor is attempting to challenge its dominance. Google earned nearly $96 billion in operating profit last year, primarily from digital ad sales, a market it dominates with around 90% control over the U.S. internet search market.
The judge also raised concerns about the extent to which users switch away from default search engines on their devices, a key issue in the trial. Federal prosecutors allege that Google maintains its dominance by spending over $20 billion annually to ensure its search engine is the default on devices like Apple's iPhone and web browsers such as Safari and Mozilla’s Firefox.
Mehta highlighted an example from the trial showing that 80% of desktop users who use Microsoft’s Edge browser also use its search engine, Bing. He questioned why this wasn’t considered evidence of the “stickiness” of defaults, as only 20% switched to Google in the Edge browser.
Google has argued that its success is due to superior technology rather than anticompetitive practices. The company's lead litigator, John Schmidtlein, stated, “Google is winning because it’s better,” emphasizing that Google's superiority was acknowledged by everyone involved in the case.
Schmidtlein also pointed out that Apple had the option to change its default search engine but chose to stick with Google, indicating user preference. Similarly, Mozilla briefly switched to Yahoo as its default search engine on Firefox before returning to Google in 2017 due to user preferences.
Mehta also questioned the Justice Department's arguments about the nature of Google's contracts with Apple, noting that it's typical for a company with an existing contract to bid again because of their familiarity with the company.
The case is expected to conclude with closing arguments this week, after which Mehta will issue his ruling, potentially in late summer or early autumn. If Google is found to have violated antitrust laws, another trial will determine how to address its market power. The case against Google is reminiscent of the antitrust case against Microsoft in the 1990s, posing a similar existential threat to a major tech giant.