What Google plans to do about online search antitrust decision: Explained

This is one of many mistrust challenges faced by Google America and abroad [File]
Photo Credit: Reuters

the story So Far: On 31 May, Google said that this online search would appeal for a no -confidence decision aimed at competing at the market fair. Google’s response to the decision came a day later when American Judge Amit Mehta heard arguments in a test, demanding the illegal monopoly of tech veteran in online search. While the US Department of Justice (DOJ) proposed stringent remedies to bring fair competition, Google is in opposition to these measures and proposed its own temporary remedies.

After considering the proposed measures from both sides, Judge Mehta is expected to give his decision. These court treatment can potentially highlight Google’s status as a prominent player in the online search business.

Doj vs. What is Google Antitrest Case?

The DOJ hit Google with several legal challenges in recent years, accusing the antitrust laws violating, and the discovery giants operate in the monopoly of many markets.

In particular, the regulator concerned Google’s revenue sharing agreements with partners such as Apple that search giants’ services are being excluded from the market and customers are looking at less options for the search engine on their equipment.

In August 2024, however, Judge Mehta gave a win to DOJ when he ruled that Google had an illegal monopoly with monopolies in general search services and general search text advertising markets. After this year, the Google Search Treatment Testing saw DoJ presenting a series of far -reaching proposals to cut the monopoly power of Google, while Google presented its list of remote million proposals.

What is the Doj case against Google?

DOJ and US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are regulators that both work to ensure that companies, including large technical firms, are complying with American mistrust laws to enable fair competition. While the two regulators coordinate their efforts, the US DOJ has the power to obtain criminal restrictions and has the only no -confidence jurisdiction in industries including telecommunications, banks, railroads and airlines.

Google’s search remission trial is one of the major themes of Multi-Billion Dollars of the Big Tech Company to offer Google services through their products with telecom device manufacturers. To bring about fair competition, the US DOJ suggested the forced sale of Chrome browser, possible divisions of Android platforms, temporary restrictions on some market activities of Google, and construction of a ‘technical committee’ to oversee Google compliance measures.

What is the protecting Google?

Google has constantly defended the quality and innovation of its products, while denying that it increases competition. Tech veteran criticized DOJ measures to reduce his dominance, claiming that data-sharing with rivals will risk customers and exit chrome and Android will increase the cost of the device along with cyber security risk.

Google strongly opposed the view of the Doj-controlled Technical Committee, complaining that it would reserve the right to decide for the US government who can access the data of Google users. This is not a favorable result for the company, as US President Donald Trump has worked systematically to reduce the freedom of federal agencies and regulators such as FTCs. Trump also suggested in the past that Google may be closed. However, DOJ suggested a technical committee appointed by a court made of independent experts.

Google’s proposed measures include more flexible browser agreements and Android contracts, as well as to ensure that Google complies with court order rather than entering government control.

On 31 May, Google posted on X on X, “while we heard a lot about how treatment will help various well-funded contestants (w/ repeatedly in Bing’s context), we heard very little how it helps all consumers,” Google posted on X on 31 May.

However, a new issue in Google’s Antitst Quality is a liberal AI, and in many markets, the monopoly of Google also damages the competition in markets related to large language models (LLMS) and AI integration.

For example: Google’s ‘AI Overview’ now congratulates users on top of their discoveries, the way customers can search for online information worldwide. Meanwhile, Google claimed that the AI ​​space was highly competitive and that rivals were concluded even without government intervention.

“The US Department of Justice 2020 Search Distribution Case Case is a rear case appearing at the time of intensive competition and unprecedented innovation. With new services such as chatgips (and foreign contestants such as Deepsek), both are unnecessary and harmful.”

What happens next google?

American Judge Amit Mehta will take time in summer months to consider the facts of the case. A decision on Google Search Measures is expected before the AP, before the Labor Day (first Monday in September).

Google is waiting for court measures, but said it still disagrees with the original decision and believes that it is “wrong”. Tech giants are also planning to present their side during the appeal, which will be revealed after the court measures are revealed. In other words, the legal process can also increase for years.

It is one of the many mistrust challenges facing Google to America and abroad, which contain cases of its advertising technology, its Android platform rights, and the treatment of developers using the Google Play store.

In April, the US DOJ announced that it was “strong” against Google in a second monopoly case, where the US District Court for the eastern district of Virginia said that Google violated the disbelief law by monopolizing the “Open-Wab Digital Advertising Markets.”

Google also disagreed with this decision and said it would appeal for the decision.