A U.S. judge has rejected the government’s demand that Google sell its Chrome web browser, but he imposed substantial requirements aimed at restoring competition in online search. Judge Amit Mehta, who in August 2024 found that Google illegally maintained monopolies in online search through exclusive distribution agreements worth billions of dollars annually, warned that a Chrome divestiture “would be incredibly messy and highly risky” and said U.S. attorneys had overreached.
Instead of forcing a divestiture, the judge ordered Google to make its search‑index data and user‑interaction information available to “qualified competitors.” Rivals can use this data to improve their services, and the ruling also extends restrictions to prevent Google from leveraging exclusive deals to dominate the emerging generative‑AI space, including chatbots such as ChatGPT.
Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, Lee‑Anne Mulholland, said the decision reflects the industry’s evolution with AI, giving people more ways to find information. She expressed concerns that the court‑imposed requirements to share search data and limit service distribution could affect user privacy. The Justice Department described the remedies as “significant.” Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater said the department will review the opinion to consider its options and next steps for seeking additional relief.
The ruling fell short of expectations from some observers who had anticipated more radical changes to Google. The case centered on Google’s costly distribution agreements—paying billions to Apple, Samsung and other smartphone manufacturers to make Google the default search engine on iPhones and other devices. The decision has already had market effects: Alphabet’s shares rose 7.5% in after‑hours trading, while Apple’s stock gained more than 3%.
This judgment is part of a broader, bipartisan government campaign against Big Tech, with five antitrust cases pending against major technology companies in the United States. Google also faces another lawsuit awaiting a federal court decision in Virginia over its web‑display advertising technology business. Earlier this year, a separate judge ruled that Google’s ad‑tech operations constitute an illegal monopoly that stifles competition. The outcomes of these cases are likely to have profound implications for the future of the tech industry and online search.
Comments are closed for this story.