Judge Preserves Apple's Multi-Billion Dollar Google Search Deal in Antitrust Ruling

A federal judge has issued a landmark remedies ruling in the U.S. Department of Justice's antitrust case against Google, declining to force a sale of the Chrome browser or ban the company from paying partners like Apple for default search placement. Instead, Judge Amit Mehta limited such agreements to one-year terms, giving competitors an annual chance to bid for distribution deals that remain a major source of revenue for Apple.

In a 230-page opinion issued Tuesday, Judge Mehta outlined the measures Google must take to address its illegal search monopoly, which he first affirmed in a ruling last year. The final judgment, which will remain in effect for six years, introduces significant new restrictions on Google's business practices while stopping short of the more drastic structural changes the government had sought.

The court rejected the DOJ's call for a permanent ban on payments for default search placement, a decision that directly impacts Apple. In his ruling, Judge Mehta noted that "cutting off payments from Google almost certainly will impose substantial—in some cases, crippling—downstream harms to distribution partners, related markets, and consumers." He added that allowing payments is "more palatable now" than when the trial's liability phase ended, citing the recent explosion of investment in generative AI that has put new companies in a better position to compete.


Judge Mehta also denied the government's request to force a sale of Google's Chrome browser, calling a divestiture a "poor fit for this case" and an "incredibly messy and highly risky" proposition. He explained that Chrome is not a standalone business and relies heavily on Google's infrastructure, and that a forced sale could lead to "substantial product degradation and a loss of consumer welfare." The court also rejected a contingent divestiture of the Android operating system sought by plaintiffs.

The ruling does, however, impose significant new rules. Google will be barred from entering or maintaining any exclusive contracts for the distribution of Google Search, Chrome, and its AI products, including Google Assistant and the Gemini app. The company cannot offer financial incentives for exclusivity, and any agreements for default placement will be capped at one-year terms, ensuring regular opportunities for rivals to compete.

Google will also be required to share certain search index and user-interaction data with "Qualified Competitors." The court ordered a one-time snapshot of this data to be made available at marginal cost, a remedy designed to help rivals build their own search indexes and overcome the scale advantage Google has built. This is a narrower version of the ongoing data sharing the DOJ had requested.

The court rejected several other remedies, including a requirement for Google to present users with choice screens, but ordered the company to publicly disclose material changes to its ad auctions. The latter remedy is designed to improve transparency and prevent the kind of secret price manipulation the court previously found had harmed advertisers.


The rise of generative AI played a key role in the decision, with the court noting that rivals like ChatGPT and Perplexity have emerged as a "nascent competitive threat" to traditional search. Apple's own services chief, Eddy Cue, testified during the trial that Apple is exploring partnerships with startups like Perplexity as it considers the future of search in Safari. The ruling comes as Google faces legal pressure on other fronts, including a recent appeals court decision that upheld a jury verdict finding the company illegally monopolized the Android app market in a case brought by Epic Games.

Google is now expected to appeal the initial liability ruling.