Follow ZDNET: Add us as a preferred source on Google.
ZDNET’s key takeaways
- Google got off easily.
- The search giant won’t have to divest itself of Chrome, Android, or its ad data.
- Nevertheless, Google is expected to appeal the decision.
In a landmark decision, Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court ruled Google violated the Sherman Antitrust Act by stifling competition. As Mehta wrote in his decision, “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.”
Now, Mehta has announced what that means in his long-awaited decision against Google. While it comes with important restrictions, it’s well short of granting the Department of Justice’s request that the tech giant be forced to sell off core assets such as its Chrome browser or Android operating system, or break up its digital ad business.
Also: Google is killing the Android phone feature that once made them popular
Mehta concluded that Google maintained an illegal monopoly in the online search and search advertising markets through exclusive contracts and other anticompetitive tactics. However, he decided that the government’s push for divestiture — calling for Google to sell off Chrome or Android — was “overreaching” and not appropriately justified, declaring such a remedy “incredibly messy” and unsupported by direct evidence.
He added that in the case of Chrome, “The court’s task is to discern between conduct that maintains a monopoly through anticompetitive acts as distinct from “growth or development as a consequence of a superior product, business acumen, or historic accident.”
Instead, Mehta has barred Google from striking or maintaining exclusive deals with phone and browser makers that guarantee its search engine as the default option. This upends long-standing contracts with Apple, Samsung, and Mozilla. Google may continue to pay for preferred placement, but only under non-exclusive agreements. So, Mozilla, which depends on Google paying it to be Firefox’s default search engine, will stay in business.
Additionally, the judge ordered Google to share some search data, specifically portions of user interaction and search index information, with rival competitors. Google will not, however, be required to share its advertising data. What this will look like remains an open question.
To enforce these changes, Mehta outlined the formation of an independent technology oversight committee, charged with policing Google’s compliance for six years. The company must also submit to ongoing federal scrutiny to make sure it doesn’t recreate exclusionary arrangements using new technology, such as generative AI products.
Also: Waze vs. Google Maps: I tested two of the best navigation apps, and there’s a clear winner
This ruling marks the most significant monopoly case since the Microsoft trial nearly 30 years ago. Google’s search advertising business, which generated over $198 billion last year, remains under pressure from ongoing antitrust scrutiny even as AI-driven search alternatives, such as Perplexity, grow.
In the meantime, the market is overjoyed at what it sees as a Google win. Google stock jumped 8% as the news quickly spread. Nevertheless, Google is widely expected to appeal the decision, and the judge’s orders will be paused pending appeal. This will take years.