In a significant shift in the ongoing antitrust battle against Google, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has dropped its demand that the tech giant divest its investments in artificial intelligence (AI) companies, including OpenAI competitor Anthropic.
The decision, announced on March 7, comes as part of a broader legal effort to curb Google’s market dominance and promote competition in online search.
Despite this change, the DOJ, along with a coalition of 38 state attorneys general, continues to push for other sweeping measures, including a court order requiring Google to sell its Chrome browser. The case, which is set for trial in April, is one of several high-profile antitrust lawsuits against major technology firms, signaling a growing bipartisan push to regulate Big Tech, Reuters reported.
Originally, prosecutors sought to force Google to divest its AI investments, arguing that such holdings could give the company an unfair advantage in the rapidly evolving AI sector. However, new evidence prompted the DOJ to reconsider, as banning Google from AI investments could have unintended consequences. Instead, the revised proposal requires Google to notify the government of any future investments in generative AI.
Google holds a minority stake worth billions of dollars in Anthropic, a key rival to OpenAI. In court filings, Anthropic warned that forcing Google to divest could strengthen OpenAI and its partner Microsoft, further consolidating power in the AI industry. This concern played a role in the DOJ’s decision to drop the demand for divestiture while maintaining regulatory oversight over Google’s AI investments.
While the DOJ is backing away from the AI divestiture demand, its broader case against Google remains aggressive. Prosecutors argue that Google has used its market power to suppress competition, limit consumer choice, and maintain an illegal monopoly over online search and digital advertising.
Key proposals in the revised legal action include:
- Chrome Divestiture: The DOJ seeks to force Google to sell its Chrome browser, which serves as a primary gateway for online searches, in an effort to create space for competing search engines.
- Search Query Data Sharing: Google would be required to provide competitors access to its search query data, though the company could charge a marginal fee and exclude entities that pose national security risks.
- Restrictions on Default Search Agreements: Google has proposed loosening its agreements with Apple and other companies that set its search engine as the default on devices, a key point of contention in the case.
A Google spokesperson criticized the DOJ’s revised approach, arguing that the proposed remedies go far beyond the court’s findings and would harm consumers, the economy, and national security. Google has also indicated it will appeal the case.
The case against Google is unfolding amid a broader political effort to rein in Big Tech. Former President Donald Trump, who has vowed to continue his crackdown on major technology firms, has appointed veteran antitrust attorney Gail Slater to lead the DOJ’s enforcement efforts.
Since Trump’s reelection, Google has been pushing back against regulatory actions, warning that the DOJ’s approach could hinder its ability to compete in AI and threaten the United States’ global technological leadership. However, both Democratic and Republican attorneys general, as well as the Alphabet Workers Union-CWA, have expressed support for the proposed regulatory measures.
