DOJ Targets Google: Calls for Chrome Sale and Android Oversight

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has escalated its antitrust case against Google, urging a federal judge to mandate the sale of Google Chrome and impose significant restrictions on its business practices, including its Android operating system and artificial intelligence (AI) ventures.

In court papers filed last month, the DOJ emphasized the need for “structural remedies” to curb Google’s dominance in the online search market, which it controls nearly 90% of globally. This includes data-sharing requirements with competitors and behavioral changes to restore competition in what the DOJ calls an “indispensable” market.

The proposals follow a landmark court ruling in August, which found Google had violated antitrust laws, building an illegal monopoly through billions spent on exclusionary practices. DOJ officials, alongside several U.S. states, are also seeking measures to regulate Google’s growing influence in AI, pushing for transparency and fairness in its dealings.

The DOJ’s court filing stated, “Google’s conduct has resulted in ‘pernicious harms’ to users, and the importance of restoring competition to a indispensable market cannot be overstated.”

The DOJ has recommended that Google divest Chrome, preventing the company from re-entering the browser market for five years. It also desires Android’s supervision, which may involve the immediate cessation of anti-competitive practices or implementing a protracted court and government monitoring process that only addresses behavioral issues.

The department also noted that Google may be compelled to sell Android entirely if the weakened measures are ineffective in reigniting competition. Additionally, there is the notion that Google’s utilization of Android to prioritize its own search and advertising operations has a detrimental impact on innovation and competitors.

The DOJ noted, “As an alternative to the divestiture of Android, Plaintiffs have presented behavioral remedies that would blunt Google’s ability to use its control of the Android ecosystem to favor its general search services and search text ad monopolies.”

Additionally, competition officials have suggested that Google be subjected to data licencing requirements, particularly in relation to its artificial intelligence technologies. The objective of these recommendations is to prevent Google from leveraging its AI advancements to further solidify its market dominance.

In the meantime, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in the United Kingdom has recently concluded its enquiry into Google’s $2 billion partnership with Anthropic, the AI company responsible for the Claude models. The CMA determined that Google’s investment did not amount to material control over Anthropic, thereby alleviating regulatory concerns regarding the partnership.

Google Pushes Back

Google has firmly rejected the DOJ’s proposals, calling them an overreach that could harm consumers, businesses, and U.S. technological leadership. The company labeled the DOJ’s recommendations “radical” and stated in a blog post:

“DOJ had a chance to propose remedies related to the issue in this case: search distribution agreements with Apple, Mozilla, smartphone OEMs, and wireless carriers. Instead, the DOJ chose to push a radical interventionist agenda that would harm Americans and America’s global technology leadership.”

Lee-Anne Mulholland, who serves as Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, shared similar concerns, labeling the proposals as a “radical agenda” that extends “far beyond the legal issues in this case.”

Google plans to appeal the final ruling after the trial in April and is set to submit its counterproposals by December 20^th,2024.