In a landmark decision on September 2, 2025, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google will not be forced to divest its Chrome browser or Android operating system, delivering a significant victory for the tech giant in a high-profile antitrust case. The ruling follows a 2024 finding that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by maintaining an illegal monopoly in online search through exclusive contracts and restrictive practices. While Google avoided a breakup, the court imposed remedies to foster competition, including mandatory data sharing with rivals and a ban on exclusive distribution agreements, signaling a shift in the search market landscape.
The case, initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2020, centered on Google’s dominance in online search, controlling roughly 90% of the market. The DOJ argued that Google’s exclusive deals with companies like Apple, Samsung, and Mozilla—totaling over $26 billion in 2021—ensured its search engine remained the default on devices and browsers, stifling competition. Chrome, with a 67% global browser market share, and Android, powering 71% of smartphones, were pivotal in reinforcing this monopoly by funneling users to Google Search and collecting valuable data for its advertising business. The DOJ sought drastic remedies, including divesting Chrome and potentially Android, to disrupt Google’s ecosystem.
Judge Mehta’s ruling rejected these divestitures, citing their scope as exceeding the case’s focus on search distribution. He noted that forcing a Chrome sale would be “incredibly messy and highly risky,” potentially harming consumers and partners. Similarly, Android’s divestiture was deemed unnecessary, as Google’s monopoly was primarily maintained through contracts, not ownership of these assets. Instead, the court ordered Google to share search index and user interaction data with competitors on commercial terms, aiming to level the playing field, particularly for AI-powered search engines like OpenAI and Perplexity. Additionally, Google is barred from exclusive contracts that condition payments or licensing on preloading Google Search, Chrome, or its Gemini AI app.
The decision sparked a 7.2% surge in Alphabet’s stock, reflecting investor relief, while Apple’s shares rose 4%, as the ruling preserves Google’s ability to pay for default search placement on Safari. However, Google expressed concerns about data sharing impacting user privacy and plans to appeal, a process that could extend for years. The ruling also has implications for the AI race, with Mehta acknowledging that generative AI technologies pose a competitive threat to traditional search, reducing the need for extreme remedies.
This outcome, while a win for Google, aligns with a broader regulatory push against Big Tech, with ongoing cases against Meta, Amazon, and Apple. By mandating data access and banning exclusive deals, the court aims to foster innovation and competition, potentially empowering smaller players in search and AI. The tech industry now watches closely as Google navigates these changes, with the ruling setting a precedent for balancing monopoly power with consumer choice.
Leave a Reply