Google has proposed new measures to address accusations of antitrust violations brought by the US Department of Justice (DOJ). The DOJ has urged significant action, including the potential sale of Google Chrome and restrictions on Google’s ability to prioritise its search engine on Android devices. The proposal follows an August ruling by Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, which found Google guilty of violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The judge labelled Google “a monopolist.”
Despite disagreeing with the court’s decision, Google submitted its proposal on Friday night, offering adjustments to its collaborations with browser companies and Android device manufacturers.
Google outlines flexible contracts with partners
In a blog post summarising the proposal, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, explained the company’s approach. The proposal suggests browser companies, such as Apple and Mozilla, could continue partnering with Google Search while having the freedom to change default settings across platforms.
For instance, browsers could assign different default search engines for devices like iPhones and iPads or switch providers for different browsing modes. Additionally, browsers can change their default search provider once every 12 months.
Google also proposed giving Android device manufacturers more options. These include preloading multiple search engines on devices and offering any Google app independently of preloading Google Search or Chrome.
Google appeals decision, sets timeline for revisions
Google plans to appeal Judge Mehta’s ruling before a hearing scheduled for April. The tech giant intends to submit a revised proposal on March 7.
Mulholland criticised the DOJ’s demands, describing them as “overboard” and driven by an “interventionist agenda.” She argued that the DOJ’s proposal extends far beyond the court’s decision, which primarily addressed Google’s agreements with partners to distribute its search engine.
While the outcome remains uncertain, the case represents a pivotal moment for Google and its dominance in search technology. The company’s proposal reflects its effort to avoid drastic remedies such as divestiture while offering partners more freedom in their contracts.
