According to the DOJ, Google must sell off Chrome in order to reestablish competition in internet search

The proposed remedies, which include the possibility of Google being placed under court-appointed regulatory oversight for up to a decade, aim to dismantle its dominance in search and advertising. The Washington federal court previously ruled that Google held an illegal monopoly in these markets.

According to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and state antitrust officials, Google’s actions have prevented competitors from gaining access to key distribution channels and partnerships that could have enabled innovation and market entry. Prosecutors argue that Google's agreements, such as those that make its search engine the default on Apple 

devices, are central to maintaining its monopoly. Google reportedly spends billions annually on such deals.

The DOJ's latest filing elaborates on earlier suggestions, asserting that the tech giant’s practices have stifled competition. Google, however, labeled these proposals as extreme, claiming they would harm U.S. consumers, businesses, and the nation's competitiveness in artificial intelligence.

Regulatory Oversight and Possible Divestitures

Under the proposed framework, Google could be prohibited from re-entering the browser market for five years and may need to sell Android if other remedies fail. Prosecutors also seek to bar Google from acquiring or investing in competitors in search, query-based AI, or advertising technologies.

A five-member technical committee, appointed by the court and funded by Google, would oversee compliance. This committee would have extensive authority, including access to Google’s documents, employees, and software code, to ensure adherence to the rulings.

Prosecutors argue these measures are necessary to dismantle a “self-reinforcing loop” of user data, advertising dollars, and market dominance that entrenches Google’s position.

Chrome and Android at the Forefront

Google’s Chrome browser and Android operating system, both pivotal to its business, are at the center of the DOJ’s case. Prosecutors allege that Google has used these platforms to prioritize its own search engine, thereby disadvantaging competitors.

Although Chrome and Android are based on open-source code and offered free of charge, the DOJ claims that divestiture could restore competition. Google contends that such actions would harm businesses relying on these platforms.

The proposals would also prevent Google from mandating that Android-powered devices include its search engine or AI products, offering divestiture as an alternative for compliance. Any sale of these assets would require DOJ and state approval.

Data Sharing and Competitive Licensing

The DOJ further seeks to require Google to license its search results to competitors at minimal cost and to share user data freely with rivals. However, Google would be prohibited from collecting user data that cannot be shared due to privacy regulations.

Prosecutors developed these proposals after consulting with industry players, including DuckDuckGo, a competing search engine. DuckDuckGo has previously accused Google of circumventing European Union regulations requiring data sharing.

Kamyl Bazbaz, DuckDuckGo’s public affairs lead, hailed the DOJ’s plans as significant, claiming they would lower barriers to competition. Google, however, maintains that sharing sensitive data with competitors could compromise user trust.

Google is expected to present its counterproposals in December, with a trial on the DOJ’s remedies scheduled for April.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paraphrasing text from "Reuters" all rights reserved by the original author.