Google scored a partial victory in a landmark U.S. antitrust case on Tuesday, as a federal judge ruled the company may keep its Chrome browser, Android operating system, and lucrative default-search deal with Apple. However, Google will be required to share search data with rivals in an effort to foster greater competition in the online search market.
The decision, issued by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, comes after a five-year legal battle between Google’s parent company, Alphabet, and U.S. antitrust enforcers. While Mehta previously found that Google holds an illegal monopoly in online search and related advertising, he stopped short of imposing structural remedies such as forcing the sale of Chrome or Android, Reuters reported.
Alphabet’s shares rose 7.2% in after-hours trading following the ruling, while Apple’s stock climbed 3%. The outcome reassured investors, who had feared a breakup of Google’s core businesses. Google pays Apple an estimated $20 billion annually to ensure its search engine remains the default on iPhones and other Apple devices.
Judge Mehta emphasized caution in crafting remedies, noting the rapid rise of artificial intelligence companies such as OpenAI. “Here the court is asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future. Not exactly a judge’s forte,” he wrote, observing that AI-driven search engines and chatbots are already challenging Google’s dominance more forcefully than any traditional rival in decades.
The data-sharing requirement is expected to give competitors — particularly AI firms — access to information critical for training models and building rival search tools. “The money flowing into this space, and how quickly it has arrived, is astonishing,” Mehta observed in his ruling.
Industry analysts described the decision as a mixed outcome. Deepak Mathivanan of Cantor Fitzgerald said the mandated data sharing poses “a competitive risk to Google but not right away,” as consumer adoption of AI-driven alternatives will take time.
Google has expressed concern over the privacy implications of the ruling and signaled plans to appeal, which could delay implementation for years. Legal experts believe the case may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. William Kovacic, director of the competition law center at George Washington University, noted that Mehta’s remedies appear designed to withstand higher court scrutiny.
The ruling also prohibits Google from entering exclusive agreements that block rivals’ apps and services from being pre-installed on devices. Recent contracts with partners such as Samsung, Motorola, AT&T, and Verizon already allow competing search engines to be offered alongside Google.
For Apple and other device makers, the decision is a relief. Mehta allowed revenue-sharing payments from Google to continue, writing that banning them is less pressing given the competitive threat posed by AI-based search alternatives.
The case is part of a broader U.S. crackdown on Big Tech, spanning both Republican and Democratic administrations. Google faces additional litigation over its app store and online advertising practices, while Meta, Amazon, and Apple are also under antitrust scrutiny. Later this month, Google will return to court for a separate trial to determine remedies in a case where it was found to hold monopolies in digital advertising technology.
With antitrust authorities weighing further action and the prospect of Supreme Court review, the future of Google’s business model remains uncertain — even as the company secured a temporary reprieve from the most drastic remedies sought by regulators.
