DOJ unveils plan to end Google’s illegal search monopoly
Table of Contents
The DOJ’s proposed Google breakup targets Search, Chrome, and ads to boost competition. Here’s everything you need to know.
The U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of states unveiled their proposed remedies today aimed at dismantling Google’s illegal monopoly in search and search advertising. These include breaking off Chrome and banning default search payments.
The remedies. They break down into five categories meant to enable and increase competition:
- Distribution remedies. This would mean ending payments that “freeze the ecosystem in place,” including Google’s multi-billion-dollar payments to Apple and Android device makers.
- Chrome divestiture. This would separate Chrome from Google – organizationally and financially. Chrome accounts for 35% of all Google search queries and drives “billions in Search revenue” (the actual number is redacted). The DOJ also pointed out that Google “underinvests” in Chrome.
- Data remedies. This would require Google to share user-side data, search index coverage, and ad performance data – essential tools that help competitors train models, improve search results, and better compete.
- Advertising remedies. This would increase transparency and control for advertisers, while helping rival ad platforms compete more effectively. Specifically, Google would be forced to:
- Provide more information to advertisers in search query reports.
- Let advertisers opt out of broad and automated keyword matching.
- Anticircumvention provisions. This would establish a technical committee to monitor Google’s compliance.
- This section includes a “contingent Android divestiture.” If competition hasn’t improved within five years, Google could be forced to spin off Android.
Why we care. If these remedies move forward, it could profoundly reshape how people access Google, how advertisers spend, and how competitors evolve in the search and generative AI markets.
Catch up quick. U.S. vs. Google antitrust trial: Everything you need to know
The opening slides. United States & Co-Plaintiff States v. Google LLC (redacted public version) (PDF).
About the author
Danny Goodwin is Editorial Director of Search Engine Land & Search Marketing Expo – SMX. He joined Search Engine Land in 2022 as Senior Editor. In addition to reporting on the latest search marketing news, he manages Search Engine Land’s SME (Subject Matter Expert) program. He also helps program U.S. SMX events.
Goodwin has been editing and writing about the latest developments and trends in search and digital marketing since 2007. He previously was Executive Editor of Search Engine Journal (from 2017 to 2022), managing editor of Momentology (from 2014-2016) and editor of Search Engine Watch (from 2007 to 2014). He has spoken at many major search conferences and virtual events, and has been sourced for his expertise by a wide range of publications and podcasts.
If you liked the article, do not forget to share it with your friends. Follow us on Google News too, click on the star and choose us from your favorites.
If you want to read more like this article, you can visit our Technology category.
