U.S. authorities are taking bold steps to enhance competition in the online search arena following a federal judge’s ruling that Google has unlawfully dominated the market for the past decade.
The extensive proposals put forth by the U.S. Department of Justice on Wednesday have the potential to significantly reshape Google’s operations. This could include divesting the Chrome web browser and sharing its search data with competing firms. However, any substantial transformation may not occur until 2026, given the slow pace of the judicial system.
So, what are the objectives of the Justice Department?
Federal prosecutors are intensifying their scrutiny of Google, with a lawsuit initiated during the final stages of Donald Trump’s presidency. The main intent behind these initiatives is to prevent Google from using its dominant search engine to unfairly suppress competition and inhibit innovation.
“The competitive landscape is skewed due to Google’s actions, with its high-quality offerings arising from improperly gained advantages,” emphasized the Justice Department in its documentation. “The remedy must eliminate these disparities and take away these benefits from Google.”
Conversely, Google has a different view. Kent Walker, Google’s chief legal officer, argued in a blog post that the Justice Department’s proposal is excessively broad and extends well beyond the court’s ruling. He stated that it could disrupt various Google services, even those that users have come to appreciate and rely on daily.
There remains a possibility that the Justice Department might soften its efforts to dismantle Google, particularly if Donald Trump, poised to assume office again, opts to replace Jonathan Kanter, Biden’s appointee overseeing the antitrust division.
Why is there a focus on Chrome?
Regulators are pushing for Google to sell its leading Chrome web browser, although the filing did not clarify who might acquire the browser or how the sale process would unfold.
Justice lawyers have described Chrome as a vital “gateway to the internet,” providing Google with valuable data for targeted advertising. They believe that the divestment of Chrome could foster a more balanced competitive environment for other search engines.
Chrome is bundled with Android devices, contributing to an ecosystem that regulators argue amplifies Google’s competitive advantage. Currently, Chrome holds the title of the most widely used mobile web browser globally, commanding around 67% of global market share, with Apple’s Safari trailing at 18%.
Although it may take several years before any tangible outcomes from this case are evident, it could result in users having a broader array of default search engine options on their devices.
What implications does this have for Android?
While regulators are not demanding that Google divest Android, they are indicating that this option remains viable.
The government is urging the judge to impose behavioral restrictions to prevent Android from favoring Google’s general search services.
Regulators have suggested that U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta should clarify that divestiture of Google’s smartphone operating system might still be necessary if the other measures fail to restore competition in the search landscape.
Android, currently the world’s leading smartphone operating system, is present on 71% of mobile devices, according to StatCounter. Given that it is offered for free, many devices from Samsung and other non-Apple manufacturers come pre-installed with it.
What additional actions are being proposed?
The Justice Department has outlined a series of behavioral measures aimed at giving rival search engines a fairer chance against Google.
One of the primary remedies includes a ban on Google from making lucrative deals that secure its search engine as the default choice on Apple’s iPhone and other high-demand devices, which could impact the revenue of companies involved in such agreements.
Other significant recommendations include:
1. Preventing Google from prioritizing its own services, such as YouTube and its recently introduced artificial intelligence platform, Gemini, in search results.
2. Mandating Google to license its search index data to competing firms.
3. Increasing transparency regarding how Google determines advertising prices for visibility in targeted search results.
4. Allowing publishers, websites, and content creators to opt-out of having their data indexed for Google’s search results or for training its AI models.
What’s on the horizon?
Google has the opportunity to propose its own set of remedies in December, while federal regulators plan to submit a revised list of proposals in early March. Court proceedings regarding these proposed measures are scheduled to commence in April, with a final ruling from Judge Mehta anticipated before Labor Day.
The remedies trial will proceed after Trump resumes office in January and assumes control of the Department of Justice, which may influence the potential penalties pursued. Although Trump has indicated that terminating Google may not align with U.S. national interests, appointees from his transition team have shown inclination towards scrutinizing major tech firms. The case, originally initiated during Trump’s presidency, suggests that Google could still face scrutiny.
Google is expected to challenge the case following the hearings on remedies, potentially leading to years of continuing litigation.
