US DOJ proposes Google divest Chrome and stop paying for default search position
In a significant escalation of its antitrust battle with Google, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a court document proposing the tech giant divest itself of Chrome, the world’s most popular browser, and cease paying billions annually to remain the default search engine on third-party platforms. The move is part of an effort to break what the DOJ describes as Google’s monopolistic grip on the search market.
The proposal, filed late Wednesday, is aimed at fostering competition and curbing Google’s alleged exclusionary practices. It specifically targets Google’s arrangements with companies like Apple and Mozilla, which earn substantial revenue from making Google the default search engine in their respective browsers, Safari and Firefox.
Apple could lose an estimated $18–$20 billion annually, while Mozilla, which relies heavily on search royalties for revenue, could face a financial blow. Mozilla reported $510 million in royalties out of its $594 million total revenue in 2022.
Key provisions of the proposal
The DOJ’s proposed remedies include several measures designed to level the playing field:
Divestiture of Chrome: The proposal explicitly states, “Google must promptly and fully divest Chrome,” barring the company from releasing another browser for the duration of the judgment.
Ending Default Search Payments: Google would no longer be allowed to pay third parties to make its search engine the default, cutting off a significant revenue stream for companies like Apple and Mozilla.
Opt-Out Mechanisms for AI: Publishers would be granted the ability to opt out of AI content scraping without fear of retaliation.
Data Access for Competitors: Google would be required to provide access to user-side data to qualified competitors and allow them to submit queries and use search results freely.
Ad Market Reforms: Google’s advertising business would face additional competition requirements, including the implementation of choice screens.
While Android is not currently included in the divestiture requirements, the filing leaves open the possibility of future action if Google does not comply.
Legal and industry reactions
Legal experts are skeptical about the feasibility of forcing Google to sell Chrome or Android, though there is a consensus that the financial relationships with Apple and Mozilla could be heavily impacted. The proposed measures also call into question the broader implications for the tech industry, particularly for companies reliant on Google’s ecosystem.
Google has sharply criticized the DOJ’s filing, calling it a “radical interventionist agenda” that would harm consumers and U.S. technology leadership. The company argues the proposals would compromise user security and privacy, disrupt popular services, and stifle innovation in areas like AI. Google also raised concerns about the management of sensitive user data and warned of potential impacts on its investments.
What’s Next?
Judge Amit Mehta, who is overseeing the case, is not expected to issue a ruling until late 2025. Even then, the case is likely to see appeals, extending the timeline for any final decision. Meanwhile, Google plans to submit its counter-proposals in December, signaling a long legal battle ahead.
