Google has fiercely countered a call from the US government to sell its widely used Chrome browser, suggesting a judge address the concerns about the company’s antitrust practices by banning it from requiring favourable treatment for its software.
In a recent legal move, Google filed a 12-page proposal suggesting that the court should stop the company from forcing mobile device manufacturers to give preferential treatment to its apps, such as Chrome, Play, or Gemini, in exchange for licensing agreements.
This comes after the US government, in November, requested a major shake-up of Google’s business practices during an ongoing antitrust crackdown. The Department of Justice has asked for a judge to order the company to sell Chrome and other measures to break up the company’s monopoly.
The US government’s request also includes banning Google from making deals that guarantee it remains the default search engine on smartphones. There have also been calls for the company to stop exploiting its Android mobile operating system.
This legal battle is the next phase of a high-profile antitrust trial, which saw US District Court Judge Amit Mehta rule in August that Google is a monopoly.
In its legal filing, Google proposed that Judge Mehta impose restrictions on its ability to use the appeal of its apps to force smartphone makers to pre-install its search software or make it the default search engine. This, Google argues, is a way to avoid what it calls “anticompetitive” practices.
The proposed order from Google reads, “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.”
This request marks a significant shift in Google’s strategy. The company is pushing for a solution that would allow it to continue its business without dismantling key parts of its operations, like Chrome and Android.
The US government’s call for the breakup of Google represents a dramatic change in approach. Regulators have largely avoided taking strong action against major tech companies in recent decades, especially after the failure to break up Microsoft in the early 2000s.
The legal process is likely to stretch on for years, with Google almost certain to appeal any ruling that goes against it. This could eventually lead to a decision from the US Supreme Court, making the future of the case uncertain.
Additionally, the outcome could be influenced by the change in leadership in Washington. With President-elect Donald Trump set to take office in January, his administration could lead to a shake-up in the Justice Department’s antitrust division. New officials may decide to continue with the case, negotiate a settlement, or even abandon it altogether.
The case has its roots in a year-long investigation into Google’s secretive agreements with smartphone makers, including tech giant Apple. These deals often involve substantial payments in exchange for making Google the default search engine on devices such as iPhones and other smartphones.
The investigation revealed that Google’s business arrangements gave it unparalleled access to user data, allowing it to dominate the global search engine market. This has raised concerns about the company’s market power and the potential for it to exploit its position at the expense of competitors and consumers.
During the trial, it became clear that Google’s dominance in the search engine market has been built on these exclusive deals. Critics argue that this gives Google an unfair advantage, preventing smaller competitors from reaching a similar level of success.
Google’s proposed legal order suggests that it is willing to make changes to its business model to avoid more drastic measures, such as the forced sale of its browser. However, it remains to be seen if the judge will accept this proposal or if the case will proceed to more significant regulatory actions.
The government’s legal action against Google is not an isolated incident. There has been growing scrutiny of the power held by major tech firms in recent years. Many lawmakers and regulators have raised alarms over the potential dangers posed by tech giants that control vast amounts of data and influence over daily life.
The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent for how antitrust laws are applied to the tech industry. It will also be closely watched by other major companies, who are likely to face similar scrutiny in the years to come.
Google, for its part, continues to maintain that its business practices are not anti-competitive. The company argues that its agreements with smartphone manufacturers benefit consumers by providing access to its popular services, such as search and email.
Despite this, the legal challenges facing Google are only likely to intensify. If the case is taken up by the US Supreme Court, the company could find itself in the middle of a long-running battle over its future business practices.
As the trial progresses, it remains to be seen how it will impact Google’s operations and whether the company will be forced to change its business model in response to growing concerns about its monopoly status.
