Photo credit: Caio/Pexels

A US federal court has proposed sweeping remedies against Google in its ongoing antitrust case, aiming to curb the tech giant’s dominance in search and digital advertising. 

The revised final judgment, filed on March 7, outlines structural and behavioral changes designed to restore competition in the search engine and advertising markets.

The proposal follows a ruling that found Google guilty of unlawfully maintaining monopolies in general search services and search text advertising. 

According to court documents, Google’s exclusive agreements with distributors, revenue-sharing deals, and control over search access points have effectively blocked competitors from gaining traction in the industry.

The court’s Revised Proposed Final Judgment introduces several measures to dismantle Google’s control over search distribution and advertising. One of the most significant remedies requires Google to divest its Chrome browser, a critical search access point through which over 30% of search queries are routed. 

By forcing the sale of Chrome, the court seeks to prevent Google from leveraging its browser dominance to maintain its search monopoly. Additionally, Google will no longer be allowed to pay device manufacturers, carriers, and browsers to set its search engine as the default option, a practice that has further entrenched its dominance.

To reduce Google’s data advantage, the court has proposed that the company must share key portions of its search index with competitors at marginal cost. 

Google will also be required to provide rivals access to its search advertising network under non-discriminatory terms. The proposal further demands increased transparency in Google’s search text advertising system, allowing advertisers to better evaluate their campaigns.

The case, presided over by Judge Amit Mehta, underscores the government’s authority to implement remedies that not only halt illegal behavior but also ensure a competitive market. The ruling follows precedents from antitrust cases against Microsoft and AT&T, where courts mandated structural changes to curb monopolistic practices. 

The Justice Department and a coalition of state attorneys general argue that Google’s dominant position has harmed both consumers and businesses by limiting choice, stifling innovation, and driving up advertising costs. The revised remedies aim to undo years of anti-competitive behavior and create a fairer digital marketplace.

Google has yet to respond publicly to the revised remedies. The company has consistently denied wrongdoing, arguing that its products succeed on merit rather than exclusionary practices. 

It remains to be seen whether Google will challenge the ruling, negotiate adjustments, or comply with the court’s demands. If the remedies are approved and enforced, they could set a significant precedent for regulating dominant tech firms.