| A U.S. federal judge on Tuesday declined the government`s request to force Google to sell its Chrome web browser, but imposed sweeping measures aimed at curbing the tech giant’s dominance in online search — marking one of the most significant antitrust rulings in decades.
Judge Amit Mehta, who had ruled in August 2024 that Google illegally maintained monopolies through multi-billion-dollar distribution agreements, stopped short of ordering a breakup of the company. However, he laid out strict remedies to restore competition in the search and emerging AI markets.
Key points from the ruling:
Chrome remains with Google: Judge Mehta ruled that forcing a divestiture of Chrome would be "incredibly messy and highly risky," rejecting the U.S. government`s most aggressive proposed remedy.
Default search deals not banned: Google is allowed to continue paying companies like Apple and Samsung to set its services as defaults, despite concerns these deals entrench its dominance. Mehta warned that banning such agreements could have “crippling” effects on other businesses.
Data-sharing requirements imposed: Google must now share search index data and user interaction information with qualified competitors, helping them improve their own search services.
AI restrictions added: The ruling also prevents Google from using exclusive deals to dominate the generative AI space, reflecting the court’s concern over the company repeating past strategies to control emerging technologies.
Oversight committee established: A technical committee will oversee the implementation of the court’s remedies, which are set to take effect 60 days after the judgment is entered.
Industry reactions:
Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, welcomed the decision, saying it reflects “how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI.”
However, she also voiced privacy concerns about the requirement to share data with competitors, warning it could affect user protection.
The U.S. Justice Department called the remedies "significant" but is reviewing the decision for potential next steps. Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater said the department may seek additional relief.
Legal analysts noted the decision was less severe than some had expected. “Google is certainly not going to be broken up, and it`s not clear that its business model is going to change a whole lot,” said Professor Carl Tobias of the University of Richmond.
Still, the ruling is widely seen as a landmark in the U.S. government`s broader crackdown on Big Tech monopolies.
Market response:
Investors responded positively. Shares in Alphabet, Google’s parent company, surged 7.5% in after-hours trading, while Apple gained over 3%.
“This is a monster win for Apple and for Google it’s a home run ruling,” said Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities, noting that the judgment removes a major regulatory overhang.
Background and broader implications:
The case, originally filed in 2020 during the Trump administration, accused Google of using its massive resources to lock in its dominance in search by securing default positions on popular devices and browsers.
It is one of several ongoing antitrust cases targeting Big Tech. The U.S. currently has five major antitrust suits pending, including actions against Meta, Apple, Amazon, and Google’s ad tech operations.
A separate federal court in Virginia is expected to rule on Google’s dominance in web display advertising later this year, where prosecutors allege further anticompetitive practices.
While Google has avoided a forced breakup for now, the new restrictions could significantly reshape how it competes — particularly in the growing field of AI-driven search — and set a precedent for future regulatory actions against dominant tech platforms.
| 
