Judge swiftly tells Apple it can't delay the Google trial

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in iOS

Apple's motion for a stay on the forthcoming Google remedy trial has been quickly denied, meaning Apple will have little say in the potential end of its annual $20 billion iPhone search deal with the search giant.

Tablet screen displaying the Google search app page with a download button, ratings, and a stylus pen nearby.
Google faces a remedy trail over its monopolistic practices



At the conclusion of the Department of Justice's case against the company, Google was legally declared to be a search and advertising monopoly in August 2024. A remedy trial is planned to determine what steps Google can take to address this, and Apple has been trying to be a major part of the process.

According to MLex, however, Judge Amit Mehta has now denied Apple's motion to obtain what's called an emergency stay of the trial. The ruling came 24 hours after Apple filed its motion in response to Judge Mehta's previous refusal to allow it any significant participation.

The new ruling reportedly says that Apple's motion has not satisfied the "stringent requirements" for such a stay. Specifically, Apple has not shown any "daylight" between its proposed remedy and the one that Google is already proposing.

Apple has not, according to the judge, demonstrated the irreparable harm it could suffer following Google's or other remedies that may be considered. Judge Mehta says that there being public interest to consider, plus harm to the existing parties, "weighs heavily against a stay."

It's not presently clear whether Apple has any right to appeal the ruling. Whatever it can still legally do, however, it will do quickly as Judge Mehta aims to get the remedies trial underway soon in order to conclude it by August 2025.

The remedy trial is at least likely to include a required ending to the deal that currently sees Apple provide Google as the default search engine on the iPhone. That deal is now known to be worth around $20 billion to Apple annually.

Apple is therefore highly motivated to have a say in the remedy trial, and this is why the company was swift to file a motion for a stay. However, the reason it had to file at all was that, according to the judge, it had been too slow to ask for participation in the first place.

Apple disputes this and says it requested participation as soon as the original trial decision was made. However, its original court filing asking for participation was filed on December 23, 2024.

That would seem to mean that it filed around four months after the original August 2024 decision. Judge Mehta, though, argues that Apple should have known about any potential impact to its business from the start of the case -- in 2020.

Prior to the new filing, Apple was told that it would be allowed to submit briefing documents. However, one reason the company gave for filing a motion for a stay was that the Department of Justice had said it would block even that amount of participation.

What happens next



When filing its request for a stay with Judge Mehta, Apple was upfront about what it would do if the motion were denied. Specifically, for speed Apple said that it was simultaneously filing a similar motion with the DC Circuit.

If Judge Mehta agreed to the stay, Apple said it would drop the DC Circuit version. Since the judge has not agreed, that separate motion is presumably in progress.

It's also presumably intended to overrule Judge Mehta's decision. There is not, however, a clear schedule for when the DC Circuit will rule on the motion.



Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    DAalsethdaalseth Posts: 3,141member
    Judge Mehta, though, argues that Apple should have known about any potential impact to its business from the start of the case — in 2020
    Voiding the deal between Google and Apple was always on the table. All the Mac sites mentioned it as a possibility at the time. For Apple to say they didn’t know this was going to happen is absurd. For them to not attempt to get involved from the beginning, even if the DoJ tried to block them was beyond absurd. For them to come in at the end of December, four months after the decision, one that was telegraphed well in advance inexplicable. Whether one thinks the deal is good or bad, should stay or go, it is rediculous for Apple to try and intervene this late in the process. That ship has sailed. 

    edited February 3
    avon b7canukstormneoncatronn
     4Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 8
    Pemapema Posts: 210member
    Goodness gracious me! That's a $20 Billion dollar infusion from Google to Apple that just flew out the window. Not to mention the fact that going forward Google will no longer have default access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices. If Google is banking on it's Gemini efforts to save their bacon then they may as well start sleeping in homeless shelters and getting handouts. 

    Losing access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices is HUGE. Make no mistake. It literally means that Microsoft can now go ahead and cut a $20 Billion deal with Apple to plug Bing or Apple will just need to beef up Safari and build out a data centre to provide comprehensive search results. The good news is with Apple Intelligence they may be able to shortcut the years-long process of aggregating hangers full of data and provide the search results via Generative AI. Forget Predictive. That's like trying to predict the weather. 
    neoncatronn
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 8
    davendaven Posts: 740member
    DAalseth said:
    Judge Mehta, though, argues that Apple should have known about any potential impact to its business from the start of the case — in 2020
    Voiding the deal between Google and Apple was always on the table. All the Mac sites mentioned it as a possibility at the time. For Apple to say they didn’t know this was going to happen is absurd. For them to not attempt to get involved from the beginning, even if the DoJ tried to block them was beyond absurd. For them to come in at the end of December, four months after the decision, one that was telegraphed well in advance inexplicable. Whether one thinks the deal is good or bad, should stay or go, it is rediculous for Apple to try and intervene this late in the process. That ship has sailed. 

    I’m not sure it would have been appropriate for Apple to get deeply involved until after it was decided Google was a monopoly. 
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 8
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 8,103member
    Pema said:
    Goodness gracious me! That's a $20 Billion dollar infusion from Google to Apple that just flew out the window. Not to mention the fact that going forward Google will no longer have default access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices. If Google is banking on it's Gemini efforts to save their bacon then they may as well start sleeping in homeless shelters and getting handouts. 

    Losing access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices is HUGE. Make no mistake. It literally means that Microsoft can now go ahead and cut a $20 Billion deal with Apple to plug Bing or Apple will just need to beef up Safari and build out a data centre to provide comprehensive search results. The good news is with Apple Intelligence they may be able to shortcut the years-long process of aggregating hangers full of data and provide the search results via Generative AI. Forget Predictive. That's like trying to predict the weather. 
    It's also possible that this is a huge saving for Google. It won't de losing access to iOS devices, just default access. 

    Although I believe Google has a monopoly in a few areas, I also believe that, in search, they are also the best. 

    I have Google Search as a default because there is no better alternative.

    I'm sure the vast majority of iOS device users see things the same way and will make Google their default as well. I'm sure most EU citizens do the same now that we have choice. 

    If anything, Apple is now going to be put under the microscope. Without that annual injection of Google revenues (money for nothing) will they suddenly see search as a viable revenue stream and develop their own search engine? 

    If they do, some people (myself included) will point the finger at the current deal as no more than a 'you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours' situation. 

    And yes, that's how I see things now too.

    The move to kill these kinds of deals among gatekeepers is essential but only way for competition to flourish is to level the playing field.

    The Google/Apple deal only benefitted those two companies and hindered competition. 
    muthuk_vanalingamronnwatto_cobra
     1Like 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 8
    Pemapema Posts: 210member
    avon b7 said:
    Pema said:
    Goodness gracious me! That's a $20 Billion dollar infusion from Google to Apple that just flew out the window. Not to mention the fact that going forward Google will no longer have default access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices. If Google is banking on it's Gemini efforts to save their bacon then they may as well start sleeping in homeless shelters and getting handouts. 

    Losing access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices is HUGE. Make no mistake. It literally means that Microsoft can now go ahead and cut a $20 Billion deal with Apple to plug Bing or Apple will just need to beef up Safari and build out a data centre to provide comprehensive search results. The good news is with Apple Intelligence they may be able to shortcut the years-long process of aggregating hangers full of data and provide the search results via Generative AI. Forget Predictive. That's like trying to predict the weather. 
    It's also possible that this is a huge saving for Google. It won't de losing access to iOS devices, just default access. 

    Although I believe Google has a monopoly in a few areas, I also believe that, in search, they are also the best. 

    I have Google Search as a default because there is no better alternative.

    I'm sure the vast majority of iOS device users see things the same way and will make Google their default as well. I'm sure most EU citizens do the same now that we have choice. 

    If anything, Apple is now going to be put under the microscope. Without that annual injection of Google revenues (money for nothing) will they suddenly see search as a viable revenue stream and develop their own search engine? 

    If they do, some people (myself included) will point the finger at the current deal as no more than a 'you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours' situation. 

    And yes, that's how I see things now too.

    The move to kill these kinds of deals among gatekeepers is essential but only way for competition to flourish is to level the playing field.

    The Google/Apple deal only benefitted those two companies and hindered competition. 
    Can't argue with your logic. You are 100% correct. Except not having default access will diminish Google's viability/visibility. You can bet dollars to doughnuts that Microsoft is seeing this as an opportunity to get their foot in the door of Apple devices. The problem is that Bing does not deliver the same length and breadth of Google search. For my part I will toggle a setting to indicate that my preferred search engine is Google, read: use Chrome. 

    Apple build out their own data centre? Not likely. Look at the last revolutionary Apple attempts: Apple Car (fail) Apple Vision Pro (fail as a consumer product) Apple Search will take years of effort to achieve the level of depth that Google has accrued over the years. 

    That said, AI may level the playing field by skirting around drilling down into massive data servers and using AI to glean the results from leased data troves. 

    Which is to day that Apple may be forced to sever the $20 Billion 'understanding' with Google. But who is to say that Apple can not pipe into Google's data centres to retrieve results using Generative AI. The question is who pays who? I guess Google will get paid a data lease for each access. 


    watto_cobra
     0Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 8
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,129member
    avon b7 said:
    Pema said:
    Goodness gracious me! That's a $20 Billion dollar infusion from Google to Apple that just flew out the window. Not to mention the fact that going forward Google will no longer have default access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices. If Google is banking on it's Gemini efforts to save their bacon then they may as well start sleeping in homeless shelters and getting handouts. 

    Losing access to 2.5 Billion Apple devices is HUGE. Make no mistake. It literally means that Microsoft can now go ahead and cut a $20 Billion deal with Apple to plug Bing or Apple will just need to beef up Safari and build out a data centre to provide comprehensive search results. The good news is with Apple Intelligence they may be able to shortcut the years-long process of aggregating hangers full of data and provide the search results via Generative AI. Forget Predictive. That's like trying to predict the weather. 
    It's also possible that this is a huge saving for Google. It won't de losing access to iOS devices, just default access. 

    Although I believe Google has a monopoly in a few areas, I also believe that, in search, they are also the best. 

    I have Google Search as a default because there is no better alternative.

    I'm sure the vast majority of iOS device users see things the same way and will make Google their default as well. I'm sure most EU citizens do the same now that we have choice. 

    If anything, Apple is now going to be put under the microscope. Without that annual injection of Google revenues (money for nothing) will they suddenly see search as a viable revenue stream and develop their own search engine? 

    If they do, some people (myself included) will point the finger at the current deal as no more than a 'you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours' situation. 

    And yes, that's how I see things now too.

    The move to kill these kinds of deals among gatekeepers is essential but only way for competition to flourish is to level the playing field.

    The Google/Apple deal only benefitted those two companies and hindered competition. 
    Just exactly when did EU citizens didn't have "choice" of search engine or the "choice" to change the default search engine?

    As for Apple losing $20 Billion in service revenue from their deal with Google sharing with Apple 33% of their ad revenue generated from iOS device search, Google can still offer that to Apple or maybe a smaller percentage like 20%. So long as Apple don't make Google search the default. Why? This to discourage Apple from making a deal with Microsoft to have Bing as their default. 

    There is no money to be made from offering a search engine for the internet. The money is made from selling targeted ads using search results. I don't think Apple is going to or want to, compete in the internet targeted ad business. The EU Commission will have a field days going after Apple if they do. Remember that BS "Gatekeeper" labeled place on Apple by the DMA? Well that would prevent Apple from promoting their own services, so Apple search can not be the default search, on their own platform. The EU might also force Apple to share their search results with competitors that wants to place ads based on Apple search results.

    The real question is, are we going to lose Mozilla Firefox. Firefox have the same deal with Google, where Google pays Mozilla a percentage of the ad revenue for being made the default search on Firefox. Though what Mozilla receives is a small fraction of what Apple gets. But for Mozilla, it represents over 85% of their total annual revenue. How is losing the choice of Firefox, good for competition and the consumers? 



    edited February 4
    muthuk_vanalingamronnwatto_cobraCloudTalkingatorguy
     4Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 7 of 8
    nubusnubus Posts: 686member
    davidw said:

    The real question is, are we going to lose Mozilla Firefox. 
    These days Firefox is the Windows Phone of browser engines. Netscape was slow and Firefox had terrible Javascript performance for years. Yes, it was standards compliant and offered better security 15 years ago, but it didn't work well with modern sites or on phones. Users went with WebKit and Chromium. Seems Firefox dropped from 30% to 4% market share while the managers increased their salaries by 400% (Wikipedia).

    And... they had a CEO that tried to block Tim Cook and other LGBT+ persons in California from getting married. At one point Mozilla made Nashville look woke. I won't miss their current products or the company.
    ronn
     0Likes 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 8 of 8
    jSnivelyjsnively Posts: 459administrator
    nubus said:
    davidw said:

    The real question is, are we going to lose Mozilla Firefox. 
    These days Firefox is the Windows Phone of browser engines. Netscape was slow and Firefox had terrible Javascript performance for years. Yes, it was standards compliant and offered better security 15 years ago, but it didn't work well with modern sites or on phones. Users went with WebKit and Chromium. Seems Firefox dropped from 30% to 4% market share while the managers increased their salaries by 400% (Wikipedia).

    And... they had a CEO that tried to block Tim Cook and other LGBT+ persons in California from getting married. At one point Mozilla made Nashville look woke. I won't miss their current products or the company.
    Ah yes, Brendan Eich. He was ultimately ousted for that. He's the CEO of Brave these days. 

    Firefox remains incredibly important though because it is the only major cross-platform-non-chromium based browser out there. Let's not forget that Mozilla also gave us the Rust programming language, MDN, and Thunderbird. They also do a ton of work in standards groups as historically staunch open source proponents. If they disappear tomorrow then world will be a worse place. It is a shame they have had a rotating door of CEOs who can't seem to find their compass.

    FWIW Firefox is neither slow nor incompatible these days, and it would be my recommendation to any privacy focused (with tweaks) or power user. At least on desktop, which is admittedly a shrinking demographic. They were largely frozen out of the transtion to mobile, which is why their market share fell so precipitously. 
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.