The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is contemplating a significant move against Google by potentially urging a federal judge to mandate the divestment of parts of its business in an effort to combat its online search monopoly.
A recent court filing by federal prosecutors suggested that not only could the judge compel Google to divest, but also to share crucial data that underlies its search engine and artificial intelligence products with competitors. They noted, “For more than a decade, Google has dominated key distribution channels, leaving little motivation for competitors to attract users.” The DOJ believes that effectively addressing these issues entails not just curtailing current distribution control but also preventing future monopolistic practices.
Further, the DOJ is exploring structural changes that would stop Google from using its other services, like the Chrome browser and Android OS, to enhance its search dominance. The focus is on Google’s default search agreements, which prosecutors aim to limit or eliminate.
In contrast, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s VP of regulatory affairs, voiced her concerns over the DOJ’s approach, describing it as “a signal of requests that exceed the specific legal issues” at hand. She warned against potential negative impacts on innovation and consumers due to government overreach in this rapidly evolving industry.
Back in August, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google was unfairly using its prominence to hinder competition and innovation. He has set a trial for proposed remedies in the spring, with an expected decision by August 2025.
While Google is planning to appeal Mehta’s ruling, it must await the finalization of a remedy before doing so. According to legal expert George Hay, this appeals process might stretch for up to five years.
The outcome of this case is critical as the government aims to counter what it perceives as anticompetitive practices that negatively affect consumers and competition in the tech realm. The implications of the case extend beyond search engines, impacting the entire technology landscape.
As this legal situation evolves, both the government and tech advocates will watch closely, knowing that the future of innovation, consumer choice, and market competition hangs in the balance.
This article includes reporting from The Associated Press