DOJ Appeals Landmark Google Monopoly Ruling
▼ Summary
– The Department of Justice and plaintiffs have filed a cross-appeal in the antitrust case against Google’s search and search advertising monopolies.
– Google had previously appealed and requested a pause on the court-ordered remedies from Judge Amit Mehta.
– The remedies required Google to share search data with rivals and prohibited exclusive distribution deals for its search or AI products.
– The remedies did not force Google to sell its Chrome browser or stop payments to partners for preferential placement of its products.
– The cross-appeal indicates neither side is fully satisfied with the judge’s ruling, particularly the remedies ordered.
The U.S. Department of Justice has formally escalated its landmark antitrust battle against Google, filing a cross-appeal that signals a continued push for stricter enforcement. This move comes just weeks after Google itself appealed a federal judge’s ruling that found the tech giant unlawfully maintained a monopoly in search and search advertising. The simultaneous appeals indicate neither side is fully satisfied with the current outcome, setting the stage for a prolonged legal confrontation that could reshape the digital landscape.
In a post on social media platform X, the DOJ’s Antitrust Division confirmed the action, stating it had filed notice to cross-appeal from the remedies decisions in the case. The core of the dispute centers on the corrective measures, or remedies, ordered by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta last fall. While Judge Mehta’s ruling was a significant victory for the government, the prescribed fixes stopped short of the more dramatic structural changes some antitrust advocates had sought.
The remedies from last September mandated that Google share certain search data with its rivals and prohibited the company from entering into exclusive distribution agreements for its search or AI products that would block competitors. However, the court did not force Google to divest its Chrome browser, a key government request. Furthermore, the ruling did not prevent Google from continuing to pay distribution partners, like smartphone manufacturers and wireless carriers, for preferential placement of its search engine or AI tools.
Google’s own appeal, filed earlier, requested a pause on implementing these remedies while it challenges the underlying verdict. The company argues the court’s findings and subsequent orders are flawed. The DOJ’s cross-appeal suggests prosecutors believe Judge Mehta’s prescribed fixes were insufficient to truly restore competition and prevent future anticompetitive behavior. This legal maneuvering ensures the case will now move to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, where a panel of judges will review the lower court’s decisions on both liability and the appropriate remedy.
The outcome of this appeal process carries profound implications. It will determine the final constraints on one of the world’s most influential companies and establish a critical precedent for how U.S. antitrust law is applied to dominant digital platforms. The legal battle, which began during the Trump administration and was continued by the Biden DOJ, represents one of the most significant monopoly cases since the government’s action against Microsoft decades ago.
(Source: The Verge)
