Justice Department demands Google sell off Chrome in new filing

Jump to First Reply
Posted:
in General Discussion edited March 9

Following a court ruling that Google has abused its monopoly in search and online advertising, the judge in the case will consider proposed remedies from both the US Department of Justice as well as Google.

The DOJ wants Judge Mehta to issue stiff penalties against Google's monopolies.
The DOJ wants Judge Mehta to issue stiff penalties against Google's monopolies.



The DOJ originally brought an antitrust action against Google in late 2023 over its deals with Apple and others to make Google Search the default search engine in other browsers and platforms.

Judge Amit Mehta of the DC United States District Court ruled in August 2024 that Google is a monopolist. While it is not illegal for an entity to become a monopoly in its field, it is unlawful for a monopoly to limit consumer choice by creating barriers to fair competition.

The remedy filing from the DOJ, as noted by the Washington Post on March 7, demands that the court force Google to sell off its Chrome browser. It also asks the court to end deals with rivals such as Apple to make Google the default search engine on the iPhone and other devices.

DOJ proposal will also hurt others as well as Google



The Department of Justice seeks to stop Google from effectively bribing companies such as Apple, Mozilla, and smartphone companies with billions of dollars in order to make its search engine the default. The department has not changed its position on the matter since the change of administration in the federal government in January.

Circular, futuristic building surrounded by lush greenery, with a large open courtyard and rainbow arch in the center.
Apple Park. Image source: Apple



The case brought by the DOJ is in spite of efforts by tech companies to curry favor with the new administration. Google, like other tech giants as well as Apple's CEO Tim Cook, contributed to President Trump's inauguration in January. This has resulted in an inquiry in the US Senate over the donations.

The DOJ did, however, recently remove a demand that Google also divest its holdings in AI startups such as Anthropic, following Anthropic telling the government that it relies on Google's money to stay in operation. Apple's Eddy Cue testified in defending Apple's arrangement with Google that Apple has no interest in building its own search engine.

Although it has backed off the divestment demand, the Justice Department has still requested that the judge require Google to notify government officials ahead of making new investments in Anthropic or other companies. Google has also offered its own set of proposed remedies to the judge in a separate filing.

Apple could lose a lucrative deal



Apple isn't the only company that accepts payment from Google to make it the default search engine, but it is likely fetching the highest price. In 2022, Google's parent company Alphabet paid Apple $20 billion to be the default search engine via a 36 percent commission on ad revenue generated from Safari search result advertising.

Apple has tried to participate in the remedy process as the results would affect its business, but Judge Mehta ruled that Apple waited until it was "too late" to intervene. The judge turned down Apple's efforts to propose alternate remedies, saying it should have known when the case was originally filed in 2020 that the outcome could affect its business.

The judge also noted that if it were to grant Apple the right to file its own proposals, the court would have to allow all other affected companies to do the same. Judge Mehta hopes to conclude the case by August 2025.

Apple has also filed a concurrent motion for delay in the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, anticipating that Google will appeal the judge's ruling. The iPhone maker argued that the current court decision would cause the company "clear and substantial, irreparable harm" and would affect both its users and Apple's entitlement to compensation for distributing Google search.

Judge Mehta will hear both the government's and Google's case for remedies in a hearing expected to take place in April, and will make a ruling on remedies sometime after that hearing.



Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 15

    Apple isn't the only company that accepts payment from Google to make Chrome the default search engine

    🤣
    GrannySmith99ssfe11purplepearwatto_cobra
     4Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 15

    The case brought by the DOJ is in spite of efforts by tech companies to curry favor with the new administration. Google, like Apple and other tech giants, contributed to President Trump's inauguration in January. This has resulted in an inquiry in the US Senate over the donations.

    I thought I read here and at other places that Apple did not contribute to Trump’s inauguration. Has that changed?
    avon b7nubuswatto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 15

    Apple isn't the only company that accepts payment from Google to make Chrome the default search engine

    You beat me to it!

    edited March 8
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 15

    Apple isn't the only company that accepts payment from Google to make Chrome the default search engine

    You beat me to it!

    In case article author Charles Martin is wondering why people are specifically quoting that single sentence of yours, it’s because you wrote “Chrome” instead of “Google”. Easy mistake to make.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 15
    retrogustoretrogusto Posts: 1,155member

    The case brought by the DOJ is in spite of efforts by tech companies to curry favor with the new administration. Google, like Apple and other tech giants, contributed to President Trump's inauguration in January. This has resulted in an inquiry in the US Senate over the donations.

    I thought I read here and at other places that Apple did not contribute to Trump’s inauguration. Has that changed?
    Tim gave $1M of his own money, Apple itself didn’t contribute. 
    Bart YGrannySmith99watto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 15
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,728member

    The case brought by the DOJ is in spite of efforts by tech companies to curry favor with the new administration. Google, like Apple and other tech giants, contributed to President Trump's inauguration in January. This has resulted in an inquiry in the US Senate over the donations.

    I thought I read here and at other places that Apple did not contribute to Trump’s inauguration. Has that changed?
    Tim Cook did, on behalf of Apple. It gave them deniability. ;)
    watto_cobra
     0Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 7 of 15
    retrogustoretrogusto Posts: 1,155member
    Interesting to see who would “buy” Chrome, for how much, and why. Not like it’s very good as a direct source of revenue. 
    stompydewmewatto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 8 of 15
    Interesting to see who would “buy” Chrome, for how much, and why. Not like it’s very good as a direct source of revenue. 
    As an example, you can look at Opera’s (the company) earnings reports to see how Opera (the browser) makes money for the company. But basically: Search, advertising, technology licensing.
    retrogustowatto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 1Informative
  • Reply 9 of 15
    citpekscitpeks Posts: 259member
    Still more editing needed.

    The headline still leads with the DOJ demand for Google to spin off Chrome, but mostly talks about ending the Google Search payola doled out to various frenemies, including Apple, Mozilla, etc.  Chrome is barely mentioned at all except in the misleading headline.

    As others have pointed out, Chrome is not a search engine, but a browser.  Two complementary, but still separate, Google products that should not be conflated, like the headline and story suggest.  Google Search works with any browser, and Chrome works with any search engine.

    In combination, they strengthen Google's market power, but that still does not make them one and the same.


    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 10 of 15
    MplsPmplsp Posts: 4,103member
    gatorguy said:

    The case brought by the DOJ is in spite of efforts by tech companies to curry favor with the new administration. Google, like Apple and other tech giants, contributed to President Trump's inauguration in January. This has resulted in an inquiry in the US Senate over the donations.

    I thought I read here and at other places that Apple did not contribute to Trump’s inauguration. Has that changed?
    Tim Cook did, on behalf of Apple. It gave them deniability. ;)
    Everybody has to kiss the ring…
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 11 of 15
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,976member
    I disagree with the declaration that Google is a monopoly. Those who are making these assertions have very little understanding of the dynamics and nature of today’s technology driven products and how their growth and spread happens due to networking effects. 

    In my opinion, the only thing that has intrinsic value in the Chrome browser is the Chromium core. All the naughty stuff is really done in Google’s search and data hoovering. Killing the Chrome browser doesn’t prohibit Google continuing to operate with business as usual in anyone else’s browser, at least to the extent that the browser owners allow. 

    I’m a big fan of Vivaldi browser which is built on Chromium. It can run most if not all plugins from Chrome. I don’t care if Chrome is brought back behind the barn and shot in the head. It’s totally irrelevant. The fact that these lawyers, judges, and politicians are going after the Chrome browser illustrates just how clueless they truly are. It’s like they’re burning Google in effigy. 
    edited March 10
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
     1Like 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 12 of 15
    y2any2an Posts: 251member
    The roles are confusingly reversed here. Perhaps Google made the first put, and suggested paying Apple (and others) for making Google search default, But when you get into the roles each party really plays here the reality is that Apple (and others) are demanding payments from Google to send search traffic to Google as their default. Extortion by any other name! in the normal course of business Apple (and others) would actually be paying Google (or any other search engine) for the service they are providing to support the volume of traffic they are sending! What clouds, this view is that Google makes money of the advertisements they can serve while delivering search results; take those away and the business relationship is more clear. A proper remedy would have Google Price the search service then agree with the cell phone makers on a revenue split for advertising served, settled by deducting their search service costs. The implementation would involve every year reviewing the fairness of the service costs and the revenue split from advertising. Any other search service would be able to participate on similar terms.
    williamlondonneoncatwatto_cobra
     0Likes 3Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 13 of 15
    badmonkbadmonk Posts: 1,352member
    By surveying android, search, gmail, chrome, youtube use of an individual, Alphabet compiles a lot of our personal data for the purpose of surveillance capitalism.  You could make the argument that all should be broken up but I suspect AI will change the story on search sooner than we expect.
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 14 of 15
    badmonk said:

    You could make the argument that all should be broken up but I suspect AI will change the story on search sooner than we expect.
    My wife has a sub to ChatGPT and uses it all the time, several times a day. Just 30 minutes ago we were coming back from the market and a question arose about the dates and times of an upcoming play at our local high school. She did a quick google search and got no results that matched what she was looking for but DID get ads and sponsored links and other cruft.

    Then she opened the ChatGPT app and asked it for the dates of the play and mentioned the name of the school. I was expecting it wouldn’t work since the info she is looking for is so recent and about a small event at a relatively small town. It came back with 3 days and the times it was showing. No ads, no sponsored links, just the answer she needed. 
    appleinsideruserdewmewatto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 15 of 15
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,728member
    badmonk said:

    You could make the argument that all should be broken up but I suspect AI will change the story on search sooner than we expect.
    My wife has a sub to ChatGPT and uses it all the time, several times a day. Just 30 minutes ago we were coming back from the market and a question arose about the dates and times of an upcoming play at our local high school. She did a quick google search and got no results that matched what she was looking for but DID get ads and sponsored links and other cruft.

    Then she opened the ChatGPT app and asked it for the dates of the play and mentioned the name of the school. I was expecting it wouldn’t work since the info she is looking for is so recent and about a small event at a relatively small town. It came back with 3 days and the times it was showing. No ads, no sponsored links, just the answer she needed. 
    What was the search? I'll try it with Google and with Gemini just as a comparative test.  
    watto_cobra
     0Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.