The long-running antitrust case against Google reached a crucial juncture on Friday as US District Judge Amit Mehta signalled he may be open to less far-reaching remedies than those sought by federal prosecutors and a coalition of states. The trial, which began in April, aims to resolve how best to curb what has been deemed Google’s illegal dominance in online search and related advertising markets.
During the closing arguments, Judge Mehta questioned the need for a decade-long regulatory oversight plan put forward by the US Department of Justice (DOJ). “Ten years may seem like a short period, but in this space, a lot can change in weeks,” he said, referencing the fast-evolving nature of the tech industry and recent moves by OpenAI, including its acquisition of a device startup, reported Reuters.
Prosecutors are pushing for Google to halt multibillion-dollar deals that ensure it remains the default search engine on Apple and other smartphones, and to mandate data sharing with rivals. However, the judge raised the possibility of more restrained measures, such as conditional data sharing and only ending those payments if other strategies fail to stimulate competition.
Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Search
The judge also explored how the increasing prominence of artificial intelligence could change the landscape of online search altogether. He expressed scepticism about whether traditional rivals like Bing or DuckDuckGo could realistically replace Google as a default engine in Apple’s Safari. “If anything it’s going to be one of these AI companies that can do more than just search. And why? Because maybe people don’t want 10 blue links anymore,” Mehta observed.
The potential for AI firms to disrupt search markets has not gone unnoticed. The trial has already impacted Google’s stock price, particularly after revelations of Apple exploring AI-powered search tools. AI’s influence was further emphasised by testimony from Nick Turley, OpenAI’s head of product for ChatGPT, who admitted the company is still years away from developing its own search capabilities to handle 80 per cent of user queries. He added that access to Google’s search data could accelerate improvements to ChatGPT and even revealed OpenAI would be interested in acquiring Chrome should Google be required to divest.
Yet, Judge Mehta questioned whether such AI firms should be granted access to Google’s proprietary data, given the case centers on search engine competition. “It seems to me you now want to kind of bring this other technology into the definition of general search engine markets that I am not sure quite fits,” he remarked to DOJ attorney Adam Severt. Severt maintained that while the case focused on past practices, any remedies must be relevant to future market dynamics.
Also read : Trump Doubles Tariffs On Steel, Aluminium Imports. But What Does This Mean For Indian Exporters?
Google Pushes Back Against Broader Remedies
In response, Google attorney John Schmidtlein pointed to changes already implemented by the company, including its decision to end exclusive deals with carriers and manufacturers like Samsung, thereby allowing competitors to preload rival apps. He argued that handing over Google’s search technology to successful AI players would be unfair.
“Coming to Google and asking Google for a handout when they are the market leader seems completely disproportionate to what this case is about,” Schmidtlein said.
Judge Mehta has indicated he expects to deliver a final ruling by August. As deliberations continue, the outcome could set a critical precedent for how legacy tech monopolies are regulated in the era of generative AI.
