In a significant ruling, a federal judge has decided that while Google acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in internet search, the company will not be forced to sell its Chrome browser. The decision, from Judge Amit Mehta, comes over a year after he initially ruled against Google in an antitrust case brought by the Department of Justice.
The government had previously pushed for a major remedy: forcing Google to divest, or sell off, its highly popular Chrome browser. However, in a detailed 230-page ruling, Judge Mehta rejected this request, stating that the government had “overreached.” He concluded that Google did not use Chrome or its Android operating system to illegally restrain the market, and therefore, forcing a divestiture would be an unnecessary and punitive measure.
While Google will keep Chrome and Android, the ruling does impose a number of new restrictions on the company’s business practices. The court is focused on addressing how Google maintains its dominance through exclusive deals.
- Prohibition on Exclusive Deals: Google can no longer enter into exclusive agreements that require device makers to pre-load its apps—such as Google Search, Google Assistant, and Chrome—in order to gain access to the Play Store.
- No More Conditional Revenue Sharing: Google is also forbidden from tying its revenue-sharing agreements to the placement of its apps on devices. This means it can’t offer better deals to partners who prioritize its apps.
- Continuation of Payments: The ruling does, however, allow Google to continue paying partners, like Apple, for pre-loading its search engine and other apps. The judge noted that ending these long-standing financial arrangements could harm consumers and partners in the market.
- Mandatory Data Sharing: In a move aimed at leveling the playing field, Judge Mehta ruled that Google must share some of its search data with competitors. The judge believes this will help narrow the “scale gap” and improve the quality of competing search engines. This requirement does not extend to Google’s advertising data.
The ruling is largely seen as a win for Google, as it avoids the major structural changes of divesting its key products. The company had argued that such a move would harm American consumers and its global technology leadership.
In a statement, Google acknowledged the court’s decision, noting that it “recognizes how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI.” However, the company also expressed “concerns” about some of the new requirements, particularly those related to sharing search data with rivals, and stated it is reviewing the decision closely.
Google had previously indicated it would appeal Judge Mehta’s initial ruling that it holds a monopoly, but said it would wait until the final judgment to do so. With this new ruling, the legal battle is far from over, and an appeal is likely.
