Table of Contents
Google lost its antitrust case against the U.S. Justice Department this week after a federal judge ruled that the tech giant had created an illegal monopoly over the online search and advertising industry. The decision will likely have huge implications for both Google’s internal operations and the way people interact with the Internet’s most popular site.
Judge Amit Mehta’s ruling specifically found that Google violated antitrust laws by striking exclusive deals with device makers like Apple and Samsung, in which Google would pay billions of dollars to ensure its product was the default search engine on their phones and tablets. During the trial, it was revealed that Google paid companies, including Apple, more than $26 billion in 2021 alone to remain the default search option in Safari. Those deals allowed Google to build a monopoly over search and unfairly suppress competition, Mehta concluded.
What happens next will determine whether Google is forced to make radical changes to the way it does business or whether it can successfully neutralize the ruling on appeal. As that fight begins to intensify, it will have broader implications for how regulators seek to rein in Big Tech and dismantle other perceived monopolies.
Here’s what to expect after the decision.
Google may be forced to change its search
The ruling in the United States v. Google case contains no remedy for the company’s illegal monopolization of the Internet search industry, and the Justice Department did not seek specific sanctions when it filed the case. Mehta will hold a separate trial (with an as-yet-unspecified start date) to determine what remedies the government should pursue against Google, which could range from adjustments to how it handles contracts to breaking up the company altogether.
Since much of the decision revolves around Google’s default search deals, one possible outcome is that Mehta rules that the company can no longer make such deals. This would allow Google to remain the default search engine if device makers opt in, but would block the multibillion-dollar payments Google has made to secure that status. Apple and Samsung did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Mozilla, whose Firefox browser uses Google as its default search engine, receives 86% of its revenue — about $510 million out of a total of $593 million — from Google search payments, according to Mozilla’s website. Fortune Magazine.
Mozilla said in a statement: “We are carefully reviewing the court’s decision, considering its potential impact on Mozilla and how we can positively influence next steps. The court did not determine a solution.”
Another outcome could be similar to what has been playing out in Europe since regulators there began forcing companies to comply with its Digital Markets Act. When users log into a service from tech companies like Google, Apple or Microsoft, They face a “screen of choice” where they are asked to select the browser they wish to use.
In what would be the most aggressive option, Mehta could also decide that Google’s illegal monopoly requires the company to completely separate services like search from the rest of the company. He could also impose fines or target other parts of Google’s business that contribute to its antitrust violations.
Google plans to appeal the ruling
Whatever Mehta’s decision on whether to sanction Google, users are unlikely to see immediate changes to its core services. Google has not accepted the court’s decision and has stated that will appeal, setting off another legal battle with the Justice Department and delaying any consequences the company might face.
The company’s defense throughout the trial was that its industry dominance is the result of producing a better product than its competitors, and it reiterated that argument Monday after its loss.
“This decision recognizes that Google offers the best search engine, but concludes that we should not be allowed to make it readily available,” Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, said in a statement that included quotes from the ruling describing Google’s search engine as superior to its rivals.
There is precedent for a major tech company successfully smoothing over antitrust violations. After the Justice Department successfully argued that Microsoft was operating as an illegal monopoly (a case often compared to Google), a federal judge ruled in 2000 that parts of the company should be broken up. Microsoft appealed and just two years later had won a series of victories that overturned key aspects of the decision and mitigated its consequences. The Justice Department and Microsoft They finally reached an agreement In 2002 this imposed some restrictions on its business practices but kept the company virtually intact.
A Google spokesman declined to provide a timeline for the appeal or further information about the company’s response to the ruling.
Another antitrust lawsuit is looming
As Google formulates a response to the loss of the case, the company is also preparing for another lawsuit from the Justice Department targeting its digital advertising practices. The suit alleges that Google has created a monopoly over online advertising and claims that its dominance forces companies to use its technology and stifles competition.
The second lawsuit threatens one of the key pillars of Google’s revenue model. The company’s advertising division controls more than a quarter of U.S. digital ads and generates tens of billions of dollars for the company each year.
Google has denied the Justice Department’s allegations and accused it of trying to pick favorites in a competitive market. The case, originally filed in 2023, is ready to go to trial in September.