> Punishing Google for being the best would be “unprecedented,” lawyer argued.
How does deleting evidence make you “the best”?
Also, obstruction of justice charges aren’t exactly unprecedented. We need obstruction of justice to be harsher than the crime itself to discourage blatant hiding of evidence
In the article this comes from a completely different argument in a completely different point against a MS argument that Google has violated the Sherman act in the same way MS did.
The quote is from Google attorney who pointed out that all the companies that had signed exclusive deals with Google had testified that they chose Google because it was the best.
It doesn't seem to have anything at all to do with the chat history argument.
Google is full of really clever people who know how clever they are. The government should just give up now and Google should just win by default.
The reverse is not true.
There's power in information, but physical power trumps that.