In a high-stakes legal battle that could reshape the tech industry, Google late Friday challenged the US government’s call to sell its Chrome browser, proposing instead that a federal judge address antitrust concerns by barring Google from leveraging its licensing terms to secure favorable treatment for its software.
In a 12-page proposed order submitted to the court, the internet giant detailed a plan that would prevent Google from making favorable distribution or the default status of its search engine a condition of licensing popular apps such as Chrome, the Google Play Store, and the Gemini service. This measure aims to address concerns raised by US regulators without requiring the sale of Chrome—one of the world’s most widely used web browsers.
A Dramatic Call for Breakup
The US Department of Justice (DOJ), in a major antitrust crackdown last November, requested a far more aggressive remedy: the forced dismantling of Google’s corporate structure by divesting its Chrome browser. The DOJ also pushed for an end to deals that make Google’s search engine the default on smartphones and limit its ability to exploit its dominant Android mobile operating system.
Judge’s Ruling and Next Steps
US District Court Judge Amit Mehta, who presided over the landmark antitrust trial, ruled in August that Google is a monopoly. The focus has now shifted to how best to remedy Google’s violation of antitrust laws. While the DOJ has argued for divesting Chrome to weaken Google’s dominance in online search, Google’s newly filed proposal suggests less drastic measures that, in its view, would promote competition without upending the company.
Under Google’s plan, the court would bar the company from:
- Requiring device manufacturers to pre-install Google’s search software as a condition for licensing Android or its proprietary apps.
- Mandating favorable placement—such as making Google’s search engine the default—on smartphones or tablets in exchange for access to popular services like the Google Play Store or Gemini.
Yet Google’s proposal also maintains that it should be allowed to offer financial considerations or other incentives to manufacturers or carriers in exchange for promoting its products—so long as the deals do not amount to coercing partners into setting Google as the automatic choice.
“Nothing in this Final Judgment shall otherwise prohibit Google from providing consideration to a mobile device manufacturer or wireless carrier with respect to any Google product or service in exchange for such entity’s distribution, placement on any access point, promotion, or licensing of that Google product or service,” the proposed order reads.
Implications of a Potential Breakup
Calling for a breakup of Google marks a significant shift in the US government’s approach to regulating Big Tech. For decades, federal regulators have largely stepped back from splitting up major tech firms after the Justice Department’s unsuccessful attempt to break up Microsoft more than 20 years ago.
Google is widely expected to appeal any ruling that severely curtails its operations or forces a sale of its assets. Legal experts believe this process could take years, possibly landing at the US Supreme Court, where the final decision would reverberate across the entire technology sector.
Potential Impact of a New Administration
Adding further complexity, the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump in January could realign the Justice Department’s priorities. With a new antitrust chief in place, officials could choose to continue the legal action against Google, seek a settlement, or even drop the case.
Trial Highlights
The antitrust trial, which concluded last year, offered an inside look at Google’s confidential agreements with smartphone manufacturers, including Apple. The scrutiny centered on billions of dollars in payments Google made to secure default status on various devices and operating systems. Judge Mehta concluded that these deals provided Google with unparalleled access to user data, solidifying its position as the world’s leading search engine.
Conclusion
As the situation unfolds, both the DOJ’s call to split off Chrome and Google’s alternative proposal remain on the table. The ultimate decision will rest with Judge Mehta, whose final judgment—likely followed by a lengthy appeals process—will shape the competitive landscape of the internet for years to come. Whether this landmark case concludes with a forced breakup or a set of behavioral remedies, the outcome will undoubtedly have far-reaching consequences for how technology giants do business in the United States and beyond.
