DOJ: Google must sell Chrome, Android could be next

[6Foot2]

Link: DOJ: Google must sell Chrome, Android could be next - Ars Technica

 

Google has gotten its first taste of remedies that Donald Trump’s Department of Justice plans to pursue to break up the tech giant’s monopoly in search. In the first filing since Trump allies took over the department, government lawyers backed off a key proposal submitted by the Biden DOJ. The government won't ask the court to force Google to sell off its AI investments, and the way it intends to handle Android is changing. However, the most serious penalty is intact—Google's popular Chrome browser is still on the chopping block.

 

"Google’s illegal conduct has created an economic goliath, one that wreaks havoc over the marketplace to ensure that—no matter what occurs—Google always wins," the DOJ filing says. To that end, the government maintains that Chrome must go if the playing field is to be made level again.

 

The DOJ is asking the court to force Google to promptly and fully divest itself of Chrome, along with any data or other assets required for its continued operation. It is essentially aiming to take the Chrome user base—consisting of some 3.4 billion people—away from Google and hand it to a competitor. The government will vet any potential buyers to ensure the sale does not pose a national security threat. During the term of the judgment, Google would not be allowed to release any new browsers. However, it may continue to contribute to the open source Chromium project.

 

This filing includes some changes from the initial remedy filings of 2024, but more changes could be coming. The case is currently under the purview of Omeed Assefi, who is leading the DOJ's Antitrust Division until Trump nominee Gail Slater gets Senate confirmation. Slater expressed support for increased scrutiny of Big Tech in her confirmation hearings, suggesting she could seek to turn the screws on Google after taking charge.

 

Unsurprisingly, Google's remedy position is light-years away from the Justice Department's. "DOJ’s sweeping proposals continue to go miles beyond the Court’s decision and would harm America’s consumers, economy, and national security," said a Google spokesperson.

 

As expected, Google did not change its suggested remedies in the case, handing the court a proposal identical to the one it filed months ago. Google says it's open to changing the way search placement deals work for browsers and Android devices, plus it would accept some additional regulatory oversight to ensure compliance. However, staffing changes at the DOJ and Google's recent meetings have not done much to change the government's desire to carve up the company.

 

Government to monitor AI and Android

 

There are two notable changes in the government's position regarding Android and AI investment. Neither area will completely escape the government's grasp under the proposed remedies, but Google won't have to sell anything immediately.

 

This case centered on search and did not initially hinge on artificial intelligence. However, things have changed in the years since this case began. Last year, Judge Mehta allowed the government to seek limits on Google's AI investments on the basis that AI was going to be a core part of web search going forward. Google has unintentionally proven that point just recently when it debuted its new AI Mode in search, which replaces the list of 10 blue links with an AI-derived answer. However, the DOJ is no longer making this request.

 

This is a small but important win for Google, which has been pumping billions into firms like Anthropic as the AI market takes shape. The company claimed that limiting its activities in this area would weaken US leadership in AI. It made this case to the newly restaffed DOJ in recent weeks, and it apparently had an impact. The DOJ no longer seeks to force Google to divest from competing AI firms. Instead, Google would have to notify the government before making new AI investments.

 

Previously, the government offered Google the option to sell Android in lieu of making any changes to how the platform operates. However, the divestment option is no longer on the table, not that Google was anxious to rid itself of such a key piece of its business. Now, the Justice Department wants the court to impose a raft of restrictions on how Google can promote its products on Android.

 

The government proposes that Google should be prohibited from making any of its search or generative AI products mandatory on Android, for example, by limiting access to AI Core or other APIs. Similarly, Google would be prevented from pressuring its partners to use Google search or AI services over the competition. If none of this is effective at breaking up Google's monopoly, or if Google attempts to ignore the remedies, the government could force Google to sell Android. In this instance, the government would have the final say on who buys the operating system.

 

With this round of filings in the rearview mirror, the next phase of the case is expected to get underway in the coming weeks. After the final ruling, Google will most likely seek to have the remedies delayed while it appeals, as it did in the Play Store trial versus Epic last year. While Google may be relieved that the DOJ is relaxing its stance on AI investments, the company is still not happy with the way the case has gone. It still hopes to have the ruling overturned on appeal, thus rendering the discussion of remedies moot.

[LeMarchand]

I have a good idea who will be buying them...

[6Foot2]

I have a good idea who will be buying them...

 

So he can run them into the ground?...

 

[mavhc]

Why would anyone buy Chrome, except to exploit its user base? It's free, how else will you make money from it? 99% of it is Chromium anyway, so why would Google pay anyone to continue to contribute to it if they can't release a browser based on Chromium?

 

Will they still be allowed to run a sync service so I can continue to save my passwords/history and sync them to my phone?

[jthompson]

I'm assuming that nobody would (could?) buy it, rather it would be spun off into a separate company underneath Alphabet.

 

Hopefully Chrome OS and Chrome browser are sufficiently distinct codebases now that this doesn't throw up the possibility of ChromeOS ending up bought and enshittified.

[localzuk]

Why would anyone buy Chrome, except to exploit its user base? It's free, how else will you make money from it? 99% of it is Chromium anyway, so why would Google pay anyone to continue to contribute to it if they can't release a browser based on Chromium?

 

Same reason Opera and Firefox have free browsers - the deals for search integration and income they can make from the userbase. If Chrome is sold, it will still have a default search engine. That position is up for grabs for income.

 

The DoJ has a problem with how Google leverages its position as a monopoly. Once Chrome isn't part of that monopoly, the same practices being used by Google now are no longer a problem.

Will they still be allowed to run a sync service so I can continue to save my passwords/history and sync them to my phone?

Why wouldn't they? Chrome is a browsing platform - not just the end software you use.

[Andrew_C]

I wonder who might be rich enough to buy it? And whether an inside deal might just be being hatched...

[mavhc]

So they're annoyed that Google pays Apple for being the default browser, and also that Google doesn't pay Google for being the default browser?

[paulkerton]

Oh, this is never going to go anywhere. It won't be allowed by the orange overlord. I wouldn't panic.

[jthompson]

If they were forced to sell it, presumably the plan would be to release a completely different Google-account-orientated Chromium-based browser as soon as possible.

[gshaw]

I have a good idea who will be buying them...

 

I see the future and it looks like X

 

“Open X”

Which one, the browser or the social network?

“Yes”

[pete]

I see the future and it looks like X

 

“Open X”

Which one, the browser or the social network?

“Yes”

 

More like:

 

Them: But I like ChromeX

IT: Trust policy forbids enabling or funding facism, use Edge/Firefox.

 

....and woe be to the DfE wonk stupid enough to say "schools rejecting facism is a political position and you shouldn't be doing that".