Eddy Cue, in a darkish go well with, peered down on the monitor in entrance of him. The screens within the Washington, DC, courtroom had briefly malfunctioned and left witnesses with solely binders, however now the tech was up and operating — displaying a picture of three iPhones, every demonstrating part of the telephone’s setup course of. Cue squinted down on the display screen.

“The decision on that is horrible,” he mentioned. “It is best to get a Mac.” That received some laughs in an in any other case staid and quiet courtroom. Choose Amit Mehta, presiding over the case, leaned into his microphone and responded, “If Apple want to make a donation…” That received even larger laughs. Then all people received again right down to enterprise.

Cue was on the stand as a witness in US v. Google, the landmark antitrust trial over Google’s search enterprise. Cue is without doubt one of the highest-profile witnesses within the case thus far, partly as a result of the deal between Google and Apple — which makes Google the default search engine on all Apple gadgets and pays Apple billions of {dollars} a yr — is central to the US Division of Justice’s case in opposition to Google.

Cue had two messages: Apple believes in defending its customers’ privateness, and it additionally believes in Google. Whether or not these two statements will be concurrently true grew to become the query of the day.

Apple is in courtroom due to one thing referred to as the Info Companies Settlement, or ISA: a deal that makes Google’s search engine the default on Apple’s merchandise. The ISA has been in place since 2002, however Cue was liable for negotiating its present iteration with Google CEO Sundar Pichai in 2016. In testimony immediately, the Justice Division grilled Cue in regards to the specifics of the deal.

When the 2 sides renegotiated, Cue mentioned on the stand, Apple wished the next proportion of the income Google comprised of Apple customers it directed towards the search engine. Dialogue of particular numbers was reserved for closed courtroom periods, however Cue wished Apple to get the next proportion, whereas Pichai wished to maintain the deal because it was. They finally compromised on another quantity we weren’t advised in courtroom, and Google has been paying Apple that quantity since.

Meagan Bellshaw, a Justice Division lawyer, requested Cue if he would have walked away from the deal if the 2 sides couldn’t agree on a revenue-share determine. Cue mentioned he’d by no means actually thought-about that an choice: “I all the time felt prefer it was in Google’s greatest curiosity, and our greatest curiosity, to get a deal executed.” Cue additionally argued that the deal was about greater than economics and that Apple by no means significantly thought-about switching to a different supplier or constructing its personal search product. “Actually there wasn’t a sound various to Google on the time,” Cue mentioned. He mentioned there nonetheless isn’t one.

That query — whether or not Apple picked Google as a result of it’s essentially the most profitable alternative or the perfect product — was a key a part of Cue’s testimony and, in actual fact, a key a part of the DOJ’s whole case in opposition to Google. The Justice Division is concentrated on the offers Google makes — with Apple but additionally with Samsung and Mozilla and plenty of others — to make sure it’s the default search engine on virtually each platform. 

Bellshaw requested Cue a variety of questions in regards to the iPhone setup course of. These three screenshots confirmed the Look display screen that exhibits up whenever you first boot up your iPhone so you’ll be able to choose font sizes; the location-tracking immediate that seems whenever you open Maps; and the App Monitoring Transparency pop-up that tells you when an app needs to gather your knowledge. Cue objected to all this stuff being thought-about a part of setup, however Bellshaw’s level was that Apple presents its customers a alternative about numerous issues, huge and small, and that search could possibly be one among them. 

Cue acknowledged that the ISA didn’t permit Apple to supply customers a alternative of search engines like google and yahoo throughout setup but additionally mentioned he wouldn’t need to try this anyway. “We attempt to get individuals up and operating as quick as attainable,” he mentioned. “Setup is simply important stuff.” Displaying individuals a bunch of search engines like google and yahoo they’ve by no means heard of would simply be a foul consumer expertise, he argued; even Cue couldn’t keep in mind the names of a number of the options to Google. “We make Google be the default search engine,” he mentioned, “as a result of we’ve all the time thought it was the perfect. We choose the perfect one and let customers simply change it.” (“Simply” is a persistent level of competition on this trial — DuckDuckGo’s CEO, who testified final week, claimed it takes “too many steps” to modify.)

As for the privateness pop-ups? That is the place Bellshaw started to press on how precisely Apple determined Google had the perfect product. She requested Cue if Apple believes consumer privateness is essential, to which he mentioned, “Completely.” Then, she confirmed a sequence of emails and slides through which Cue and Apple railed in opposition to Google’s privateness insurance policies. Cue readily agreed. “We’ve all the time thought we had higher privateness than Google,” he advised Bellshaw. He mentioned that one provision of the ISA with Google was that Google needed to permit individuals to go looking with out logging in and that Apple has executed issues in Safari and round its platforms to make it tougher for Google or anybody else to trace customers.

Bellshaw by no means fairly mentioned it, however the DOJ’s implication gave the impression to be that, primarily, Google is a privateness menace anathema to every little thing Apple believes is essential to its customers, however Apple provides it a central place in its platform as a result of Google pays it so handsomely. Bellshaw requested Cue to assessment a few of Apple’s monetary filings. Isn’t it true that the ISA represents a good portion of Apple’s income, she requested? Cue mentioned that’s not how Apple seems at it as a result of it doesn’t account for all of the work Apple did to make its platform so interesting that an settlement like this might work in addition to it does. 

Later, after a closed session within the courtroom and a break for lunch, Google lawyer John Schmidtlein led Cue by way of a historical past of the Google / Apple partnership, and a historical past of the Safari browser. Cue famous that Safari’s mixture of URL and search bar was a consumer interface innovation, and the seamless Google integration was a part of what made it work. In early promotional supplies for Safari, Schmidtlein identified, the Google integration was almost all the time talked about.

“Earlier than 2003,” Cue mentioned, “the best way that you just searched the net was you needed to go in and also you needed to sort in google.com within the URL discipline, or you possibly can sort in one other URL. We got here up with the concept that if you happen to sort something within the URL discipline that’s not a URL, it simply goes to go looking.”

Schmidtlein’s general level was that Google helped Safari succeed not by forcing Apple’s hand, however by being an awesome product that built-in seamlessly with Apple’s personal stuff. He referenced Apple’s offers with Yahoo and Bing that make these providers straightforward to seek out, and each males argued that switching search engines like google and yahoo is very easy as to be a non-issue. Bellshaw briefly stepped as much as rebut that notion, and that was it for Cue’s testimony.

No less than, that’s all of the testimony we noticed. Like so many issues on this trial, the star witness was saved principally beneath wraps due to complaints and worries about revealing confidential numbers and company secrets and techniques. However the questions put to Cue have been the identical ones the DOJ goes to maintain asking: is Google actually the perfect search engine, or is it simply the one writing the largest checks? And if these checks went away, what would the search engine market seem like? Cue mentioned Apple’s by no means actually thought of it. Google mentioned Apple can be foolish to take action. And the Justice Division thinks it’s about time Apple begins doing so.

Replace September twenty sixth, 3:32PM ET: Added data on the rest of Cue’s testimony.