What you need to know
- The DOJ is still pushing Google to sell Chrome, and maybe even Android, to break its search monopoly.
- Selling Chrome would give other search engines a real shot at a broader reach of users, as per the filing.
- The DOJ dropped its demand for Google to sell AI investments but wants stricter oversight.
The US Department of Justice is again pushing Google to sell off Chrome, aiming to crack its search dominance and level the playing field.
In a revised filing to Judge Amit Mehta, the DOJ is doubling down on its push for Google to sell off its web browser, and maybe even Android. The agency argues that breaking up these key assets is the only way to fix Google’s monopoly problem.
A group of 38 state attorneys general and the DOJ have teamed up to file the updated proposal laying out the final steps to break Google’s illegal stranglehold on the search engine market. It stays close to the original one submitted to Judge Amit Mehta last November, following his historic ruling that Google is a monopoly in online search.
In its latest filing, the DOJ argues that forcing Google to sell Chrome would break its grip on a key search gateway, opening the door for real competition. It also kept an earlier proposal to stop Google from cutting deals with companies like Apple, phone manufacturers, and Mozilla to lock in its search engine as the default.
A key change in the DOJ’s updated proposal is ditching the demand for Google to sell off its AI investments. Instead of an outright ban, the agency is moving toward a more watchful approach, requiring Google to give regulators a heads-up before making any moves in the AI space.
The DOJ is also holding off on forcing Google to sell Android for now. Instead, the court will keep the option on the table, ready to step in if the current fixes don’t level the playing field. If competition doesn’t improve, Google might have to let go of the operating system down the line.
Google is expected to counter the proposals with its own. In its December filing, the company slammed the DOJ’s initial demands as over the top, calling them an “interventionist agenda” that went way beyond the court’s ruling. Google argued the case was about its deals with partners, not the massive overhaul the DOJ is pushing for.