On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C., ruled against the Department of Justice's request that Google divest its Chrome browser and Android operating system, marking a key turning point in the years-long antitrust case. While avoiding the harshest penalties, Google is still prohibited from signing exclusive distribution agreements with device manufacturers for search, Chrome, Google Assistant, and Gemini apps, and is required to open up some search data to competitors. Shares of Google's parent company, Alphabet, rose 7% after hours on the news.
The ruling stems from the court's finding last fall that Google engaged in monopoly behavior in search. Mehta stated at the time that Google "is a monopoly and has engaged in behavior to maintain its monopoly position." During the weeks-long "remedies" hearing, Google warned that forced divestitures would harm consumers, with Chrome head Parisa Tabrizi even saying the divested browser would become an "insecure and outdated shadow product." Ultimately, the court agreed with some of Google's arguments, finding the Department of Justice's request "excessive," but explicitly prohibited it from maintaining its market dominance through bundling agreements—for example, requiring pre-installed Google services as a condition for access to the Google Play Store.
Notably, the court did not prohibit Google from paying distribution fees to its partners, meaning its high-revenue sharing agreement with Apple remains in place. Mehta emphasized in the ruling that completely severing payment channels "would have a significant adverse impact on the market and consumers." Data shows that 95% of mobile searches in the United States were conducted through Google before 2020, and this market dominance is a core concern of antitrust regulators.
Analysts generally believe the ruling will have far-reaching implications for the tech industry. Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities noted that it paves the way for deeper collaboration between Apple and Google in the field of AI, while Robert Siegel of Stanford University warned that without the protection of its exclusivity agreement, Google will face greater challenges from competitors like OpenAI. Neither Google nor the Department of Justice has commented on the ruling, but it undoubtedly sets a new benchmark for global tech antitrust regulation.
