Tech companies regularly face lawsuits, whether from regulators, governments, or even other businesses and individuals. But no case is as significant as the one between Google and the U.S. Department of Justice, which accuses it of monopolizing the search engine and online advertising industry.
A historic lawsuit against Google
Although the judgment was handed down last August, the repercussions of this case continue to this day, particularly with the arrival of the government Donald Trump, which gave Google hope for a time that the new administration might reverse the decision made under Joe Biden — which ultimately did not happen.
Breaking up Google as the final solution
On March 7, the U.S. Department of Justice formally requested that Google sell its Chrome browser—one of the company's flagship products—to a third party approved by the department.
This sale not only affects the browser itself, but also all of its features, associated services, and integrations, to ensure Chrome's continued existence under its new management. Google will also have to notify all of its partners associated with Chrome or its associated investments.
The ministry also demands that Google completely stop paying phone manufacturers or other companies to make Google Search the default search engine in future devices or services. This should give companies a free choice among available search engines.
An exception for artificial intelligence
Good news for Google: the ministry has reversed its request regarding future investments in artificial intelligence. Although this point was included in last November's decisions, Google will not be required to diversify its AI investments. However, it will have to officially inform the ministry of any future operations in this area.
Why did the court declare Google a monopoly company?
In 2023, a historic trial began against Google, accused of locking down the search engine market and blocking all competition, particularly from new entrants.
In 2024, Washington, DC-based federal judge Amit Mehta concluded that Google holds absolute monopoly power in this market.
Mehta based his decision on several factors:
Contracts between Google and device manufacturers (phones, computers, etc.), which impose Google as the default search engine.
These contracts are often based on sharing advertising revenue, which creates a strong incentive to keep Google as the default search engine.
According to the judge's figures, 70% of searches in the United States go through Google, thanks to these exclusive partnerships. This gives Google complete control over online advertising, ad placement, and pricing.
Additionally, the Chrome browser has been identified as part of the problem, being one of the most used in the world.
What is the current situation for Google?
The Justice Department's new request reignites the debate over Google's next steps. While the August ruling remains in effect, the department's current position is less radical than that adopted under the Biden administration.
According to Kent Walker, Google's head of global legal affairs, the company could challenge the current demand in court and seek to negotiate it.
Attorney Paul Swanson, an expert in technology law, believes the government's current strategy may be to take a tough stance initially and then allow Google to negotiate a reduced sentence.
The Link Between Donald Trump and Google: A Factor of Influence?
Google currently maintains a good relationship with the Trump administration. The company notably contributed $1 million to Donald Trump's inauguration ceremony and even changed some geographical names, such as the name of the Gulf of Mexico, in response to requests from the Trump administration early in his term.
According to the New York Post, representatives from Alphabet (Google's parent company) met with members of the Justice Department on March 5, just before the department's new request, in an attempt to ease the upcoming decisions.
It stands to reason that the Donald Trump administration wants to protect major American companies and support their investments, particularly those in Silicon Valley. However, only time will tell whether Google will be able to avoid being broken up or mitigate the impact of this historic case.
