Google’s search monopoly case continues; here’s what’s at stake

Does Google have to say goodbye to Chrome? The United States Department of Justice argues that Google should not be allowed to continue profiting from exclusive agreements with tech companies to hold its global monopoly as the world’s largest search engine.

It all started with a ruling dating back to August 2024. US Federal District Judge Amit Metha ruled that Google acted as a monopolist by abusing its dominant position in the search engine market.

Google paid billions of dollars to tech developers, carriers, and smartphone makers to be the default search engine on iPhones and Android smartphones. For example, Google has paid over $26 billion in 2021 to make sure it was the default search engine on smartphones.

Phone manufacturers had little to no room to say ‘no’ to Google, because it was the only way they were allowed to install the Play Store on their devices, which was crucial to the success of their phones. As a result, competitors had fewer opportunities to compete in the search engine market.

“Sure, users can access Google’s rivals by switching the default search access point or by downloading a rival search app or browser. But the market reality is that users rarely do so,” Judge Metha ruled.

In addition, the judge ruled that Google’s practices fundamentally “reduced the incentive to invest and innovate in search.”

In a separate antitrust case against Google, US District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, found Google guilty of holding an illegal monopoly in online advertising technology.

“In addition to depriving rivals of the ability to compete, this exclusionary conduct substantially harmed Google's publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web,” Brinkema stated last week.

Eight months after what experts are calling “a historic win for the American people,” the antitrust case against Google’s dominance in the search engine market continues.

On Monday, the Department of Justice demanded that Google terminate all contracts with device manufacturers to set Google Search as their default search engine. Additionally, Google has to sell its web browser Chrome to create a level playing field. If these measures don’t have the desired effect of improving competition, the Department of Justice has even proposed that Google would have to divest its Android division.

Naturally, Google strongly disagrees with these demands, suggesting it poses a threat to the Android ecosystem and consumers worldwide.

“The unprecedented array of proposed remedies would harm consumers and innovation, as well as future competition in search and search ads, in addition to numerous other adjacent markets. They bear little or no relationship to the conduct found anticompetitive, and are contrary to the law. The breadth and depth of the proposed remedies risk doing significant damage to a complex ecosystem. Some of the proposed remedies would imperil browser developers and jeopardize the digital security of millions of consumers,” Google lawyers said in a filing leading up to hearings.

In the coming weeks, the Department of Justice and Google will try to convince the court of their positions. The court will present its ruling probably during the Summer.