The United States Department of Justice argued Wednesday that Google should divest its Chrome browser as part of a remedy to break up the company’s illegal monopoly in online search, according to a filing with the U.S District Court of the District of Columbia. Google would not be allowed to re-enter the search market for five years if the DOJ’s proposed remedy is approved.
Ultimately, it will be up to District Court Judge Amit Mehta to decide what Google’s final punishment will be, a decision that could fundamentally change one of the world’s largest businesses and alter the structure of the internet as we know it. That phase of the trial is expected to kick off sometime in 2025.
Judge Mehta ruled in August that Google was an illegal monopoly for abusing its power over the search business. The judge also took issue with Google’s control of various gateways to the internet and the company’s payments to third parties in order to retain its status as a default search engine.
The DOJ’s latest filing suggested that Google’s ownership of Android and Chrome, which are key distribution channels for its search business, pose “a significant challenge” to apply remedies for making the search market competitive.
The Justice Department proposed other remedies to address the search giant’s monopoly, including that Google spin off its Android mobile operating system. The filing noted that Google and other partners might be against that spin-off and suggested strict remedies, including not using Android to disadvantage its search competitors. The DOJ hinted that if Google fails to put limitations on Android, it should be forced to sell it off.
Prosecutors also argued that the company should be prohibited from entering into exclusionary third-party contracts with browser or phone companies, such as Google’s contract with Apple, which is to be the default search engine on all Apple products.
The DOJ also argued that Google should license its search data along with ad click data to rivals.
Additionally, the DOJ also jotted out conditions prohibiting Google from entering the browser market again five years after the company spins off Chrome. Plus, it also proposed that after the Chrome sale, Google shouldn’t acquire or own any rival ad text search, query-based AI product, or ads technology. What’s more, the document outlined provisions for publishers to opt out of Google using their data to train AI models.
If the court accepts these remedies, Google will face a serious setback as a competitor to OpenAI, Microsoft, and Anthropic in AI technology.
Google’s response
In reponse, Google said DOJ’s latest filing was “a radical interventionist agenda” that would harm people the U.S. and the country’s tech prowess in the world.
“DOJ’s wildly overbroad proposal goes miles beyond the Court’s decision. It would break a range of Google products — even beyond Search — that people love and find helpful in their everyday lives,” president of global affairs and Google’s chief legal officer Kent Walker said in a blog post.
Walker made additional arguments that the proposal would put security and privacy of users at stake, detoriate quality of Chrome and Android, and hurt services like Mozilla Firefox, which depends on Goolge Search.
He added that if the proposal goes through, it will hamper people’s ability to access Google Search. Plus, it would damage the company’s prospects in AI race.
“DOJ’s approach would result in unprecedented government overreach that would harm American consumers, developers, and small businesses — and jeopardize America’s global economic and technological leadership at precisely the moment it’s needed most,” he said.
The company is set to file its reponse to this filing next month.
The Wednesday filing confirms earlier reports that prosecutors were considering pushing Google to spin off Chrome, which controls about 61% of the browser market in the U.S., according to web traffic service StatCounter.
