The U.S. government is asking a federal district judge to compel Google to break up its core businesses.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) said in a Tuesday court filing that “structural remedies” are on the table. This term, often used to describe the breakup of a company to prevent anti-competitive practices, suggests that the government is contemplating measures to curb Google’s market power.
Per the filing, the U.S. is “considering remedies to address four categories of harms related to Google’s (1) search distribution and revenue sharing, (2) generation and display of search results, (3) advertising scale and monetization, and (4) accumulation and use of data.”
“For each area, the remedies necessary to prevent and restrain monopoly maintenance could include contract requirements and prohibitions; non-discrimination product requirements; data and interoperability requirements; and structural requirements,” the filing said.
Depending on how the court eventually rules, the verdict could lead to the divestiture of some of Google’s most profitable operations, such as its advertising and search business, and fundamentally change how the company operates. This would not only affect Google but also the tech industry, potentially altering the competitive landscape and opening up new opportunities for innovation and competition.
“The DOJ’s radical and sweeping proposals risk hurting consumers, businesses and developers,” Google said in a statement shared with PYMNTS, noting that “the DOJ’s outline also comes at a time when competition in how people find information is blooming, with all sorts of new entrants emerging and new technologies like [artificial intelligence] transforming the industry.”
Read also: Google’s Advertising Business on Trial as US Seeks Blockbuster Breakup
Per the court filing, it is the opinion of the DOJ that Google has sustained monopolistic control over search and advertising markets through illegal practices. These monopolies are not the result of Google’s innovative prowess but rather a web of anti-competitive tactics aimed at suppressing rivals and maintaining dominance.
For at least the past 10 years, “Google’s anticompetitive conduct resulted in interlocking and pernicious harms that present unprecedented complexities in a highly evolving set of markets,” the filing said. “These markets are indispensable to the lives of all Americans, whether as individuals or as business owners, and the importance of effectively unfettering these markets and restoring competition cannot be overstated.”
The 32-page filing lists options to stop the tech giant from gaining a competitive advantage by using its app store, Android operating system, and Chrome browser to boost its search business. One includes making the data Google collects available to its rivals.
The federal-level move signals a more aggressive regulatory stance toward Big Tech companies, which have come under scrutiny in recent years. Its implications could reshape how we think about platform economies and the extent to which tech companies can consolidate power.
See also: Tech Industry Braces for Fallout From Google Antitrust Verdict
As evidenced in a public statement posted by the company Wednesday (Oct. 9), Google’s defense will likely argue that its market dominance is the natural result of its technological innovation and consumer preference. However, if the court rules against Google, it could set a new precedent for how antitrust law is applied to digital platforms, particularly in markets that rely heavily on data, network effects and scale.
One element of the DOJ lawsuit focuses on how Google’s control of data and AI-driven insights reinforces its market power. Data is a critical resource in both the search and advertising markets, and the more data Google controls, the more it can refine its algorithms and improve its services. This creates a feedback loop that makes it difficult for rivals to catch up. The case could set legal precedents around data ownership and usage, particularly as AI becomes central to business strategies.
Still, the DOJ’s filing is subject to change, with a refined “Proposed Final Judgement” due in November and then, in accordance with the court’s order, a “Revised Proposed Final Judgment” set to be shared in March 2025.
We’re always on the lookout for opportunities to partner with innovators and disruptors.
Learn More