Google Escapes Chrome Breakup in Antitrust Case But Must Terminate Exclusive Partnerships and Disclose Data

Overview of the DOJ’s Ruling on Google’s Practices

In a significant development, the U. S.Department of Justice (DOJ) initiated legal actions last year aiming to compel Google to relinquish control of its Chrome browser and Android operating system, citing anti-competitive behaviors. Today, U. S.District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta released a ruling informed by the arguments presented by the DOJ, Google, and other stakeholders.

Key Takeaways from the Court Judgment

Restrictions on Exclusive Contracts:
- The DOJ sought to prevent Google from entering exclusive agreements with companies such as Apple and various original equipment manufacturers (OEMs).
- This request was partially upheld; Google is now prohibited from:
  - Signing exclusive distribution agreements for Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, or the Gemini application.
  - Tying Play Store licensing to the distribution of these products.
  - Conditioning revenue-sharing on app distributions.
  - Restricting partners from offering competing search engines, browsers, or generative AI products.
Divestiture Decisions:
- The DOJ had advocated for the divestiture of Android and Chrome.
- The court denied this request, concluding that Google had not misused these assets in a manner warranting divestiture.
Payment Practices with Default Partners:
- While Google will continue its financial agreements to maintain its position as the default for search and browser services, the court ruled that banning such payments could negatively impact distribution partners and various markets.
- Notably, Mozilla relies on its partnership with Google for survival.
Data Sharing with Competitors:
- The DOJ requested that Google share extensive data, including search index and ad data, for ten years with competitors.
- The ruling mandates Google to share specific search index and user interaction data with “Qualified Competitors, ”while ads data remains excluded from this requirement.
Ad Business Data Requirements:
- The court decided that Google must provide Qualified Competitors with access to search and search-ad syndication services under commercial terms consistent with its existing practices.
Investment and Acquisition Restrictions:
- The DOJ’s plea to limit Google’s investments in companies focused on search and ads was denied, allowing Google to continue its acquisition strategies unimpeded.

Implications of the Ruling

The complete judgment can be accessed here. The ruling appears favorable for Google, maintaining the current business landscape largely intact. In fact, following the announcement, Google’s stock rose by 7% in after-hours trading. However, the decision has not been well-received by some competitors, including DuckDuckGo, which expressed concerns about the efficacy of the court’s remedies in fostering genuine competition.

A statement from our CEO on the US v Google remedies: “We do not believe the remedies ordered by the court will force the changes necessary to adequately address Google’s illegal behavior. Google will still be allowed to continue to use its monopoly to hold back competitors, …

— DuckDuckGo (@DuckDuckGo) September 2, 2025

Looking Ahead

While this ruling restricts Google from locking partners into exclusive agreements, it still permits the company to maintain default placement deals. Observers now await potential responses from the DOJ, including the possibility of an appeal against this ruling.

Source & Images