Under President Donald Trump’s second administration, there has been a notable shift in regulatory enforcement against tech businesses, with several high-profile cases being dropped or paused. For example, the Department of Justice has moved to dismiss a lawsuit against SpaceX that alleged hiring discrimination. In addition, the administration halted Consumer Financial Protection Bureau enforcement actions against Meta for improperly using Facebook users’ financial data.
Google, however, is another story. The DoJ reaffirmed its demand for Google to divest its Chrome web browser.
Also: 6 obscure browsers that are better than Chrome
This move is part of a broader strategy to address Google’s alleged monopolistic practices in search and online advertising. The DoJ’s latest filing, submitted to federal Judge Amit Mehta, maintains that Google must sell off Chrome to restore competition in the online search market.
Why? The DoJ explained, “Google’s anticompetitive conduct has denied users of a basic American value — the ability to choose in the marketplace. Through its sheer size and unrestricted power, Google has robbed consumers and businesses of a fundamental promise owed to the public — their right to choose among competing services. Google’s illegal conduct has created an economic Goliath, one that wreaks havoc over the marketplace to ensure that — no matter what occurs — Google always wins.”
<!–>
Specifically, the DoJ requires Google “to divest Chrome, which will permanently stop Google’s control of this critical search access point and allow rival search engines the ability to access the browser that for many users is a gateway to the Internet.”
If I were a Google executive I’d be sweating right about now.
The DoJ’s push for Chrome’s divestiture springs from a landmark antitrust ruling last year, which found Google guilty of maintaining an illegal monopoly in online search. The DoJ found Google’s control over Chrome unfairly suppresses competition by integrating it closely with Google’s search engine. This integration allows Google to dominate the search market and manipulate its ad auction system, increasing advertisers’ costs while boosting its revenue.
If Google is forced to sell Chrome, it could upend the browser market. Today, Chrome has no real competitors. All the other major browsers, such as Microsoft Edge, rely on Chrome’s underlying open-source browser, Chromium,
Also: The best secure browsers for privacy in 2025: Expert tested
The sole significant exception is Mozilla’s Firefox. However, Firefox relies on Google for its income. Moreover, Firefox’s market share has continued to slide into irrelevance. Recent Mozilla management changes have also damaged Firefox’s reputation for privacy.
The DoJ also demands that Google no longer make deals with Mozilla or other companies, such as Google paying Apple to use its search engine by default. However, Google argues, “Browser companies like Apple and Mozilla should continue to have the freedom to do deals with whatever search engine they think is best for their users.”
Additionally, Google claims that forcing it to give up Chrome would be overly aggressive and could harm consumers by disrupting integrated services and impacting innovation and security. Google spokesperson Peter Schottenfels said in a statement, “DOJ’s sweeping proposals continue to go miles beyond the Court’s decision, and would harm America’s consumers, economy and national security.”
Needless to say, Google has vowed to appeal the antitrust ruling and proposed alternative solutions to enhance partner flexibility without resorting to divestiture.
Also: Trump axes AI staff and research funding, and scientists are worried
In the meantime, Google, in conjunction with The Linux Foundation, Meta, Microsoft, and Opera, is working on “Supporters of Chromium-Based Browsers,” an initiative to create more fully empowered Chromium-based web browsers. Such a browser, which would not be under Google’s control, might prove to be a Chrome replacement the DoJ would find acceptable and still work well for Google’s business. Stay tuned to see what happens next with this development.
Interestingly, while continuing to demand Google get rid of Chrome, the DoJ has softened its stance on Google’s AI investments. Unlike previous demands, the department now requires only prior notification for future AI-related investments, allowing Google to continue its advancements in AI while ensuring regulatory oversight. This is all in keeping with the Trump administration’s pulling back from government AI regulation.
The case is set to proceed with hearings in April, where both the DoJ and Google will present their arguments on proposed remedies. A final ruling is expected this summer.
–>
Source: Robotics - zdnet.com
