What happened
A federal judge in Washington, D.C., Tuesday rejected the government's request to break up Google, after having ruled last year that the company's search engine was an illegal monopoly. But Judge Amit Mehta did order more modest changes, including instructing Google to share some of its search data with "qualified competitors" and barring it from paying tech companies to make its search engine, AI chatbot or Android Play Store "exclusive" services on their smartphones, computers or other devices.
Who said what
Mehta's opinion was the "most consequential antitrust decision on Big Tech's business practices since a federal judge's failed bid to break up Microsoft in the early 2000s," Politico said. The Justice Department had asked Mehta to force Google to sell its Chrome browser, share expansive data on its search infrastructure and impose other sanctions.
In his ruling, Mehta said he needed to craft antitrust remedies "with a healthy dose of humility," especially given the rise of a competitive generative AI market that could eclipse Google's search dominance without government intervention. Unlike most cases, the court here was "asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future," he said. "Not exactly a judge's forte."
What next?
Gabriel Weinberg, the CEO of search competitor DuckDuckGo, called Mehta's remedies "a nothingburger." But Vanderbilt University antitrust law expert Rebecca Haw Allensworth said the changes ordered for Microsoft, also initially considered weak, had opened the internet to competitors, including Google. Given likely appeals, "it could take years" before Google "is required to act on the ruling," Reuters said.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
-
Who benefits from Trump’s new $100,000 H-1B visa fee?In the Spotlight American workers might see gains. But there are drawbacks.
-
Will billionaires kill France’s proposed wealth tax?Today's Big Question In Paris, a preview of the debate over Zohran Mamdani’s NYC proposal
-
Book reviews: ‘Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution’ and ‘Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius of Shakespeare’s Greatest Rival’Feature A Supreme Court justice sets out her philosophy and the English Renaissance’s wild child
-
Is the UK government getting too close to Big Tech?Today’s Big Question US-UK tech pact, supported by Nvidia and OpenAI, is part of Silicon Valley drive to ‘lock in’ American AI with US allies
-
Google: A monopoly past its prime?Feature Google’s antitrust case ends with a slap on the wrist as courts struggle to keep up with the tech industry’s rapid changes
-
South Korea's divide over allowing Google MapsTalking Points The country is one of few modern democracies where the app doesn't work
-
Supreme Court allows social media age check lawSpeed Read The court refused to intervene in a decision that affirmed a Mississippi law requiring social media users to verify their ages
-
Grok brings to light wider AI antisemitismIn the Spotlight Google and OpenAI are among the other creators who have faced problems
-
Is AI killing the internet?Talking Point AI-powered browsers and search engines are threatening the death of the open web
-
Nvidia hits $4 trillion milestoneSpeed Read The success of the chipmaker has been buoyed by demand for artificial intelligence
-
X CEO Yaccarino quits after two yearsSpeed Read Elon Musk hired Linda Yaccarino to run X in 2023
