What Google Can and Cannot Do After Landmark US Court Ruling
Landmark Antitrust Ruling Imposes Major Restrictions on Google
Washington, D.C.: In a significant antitrust decision on September 2, 2025, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta imposed major restrictions on Google’s business practices to restore competition in the search market. The ruling follows a 2024 finding that Google violated U.S. antitrust laws under Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
While the judge did not order Google to sell Chrome, the world’s most widely used browser, the company is barred from signing exclusive agreements that make Google the default search engine on devices such as Apple’s Safari or Samsung smartphones.
What It Means for Users
Device makers can now preload alternative search engines like Bing, DuckDuckGo, or Opera.
Chrome’s privacy mode must allow users to set different default search engines.
Google can still pay for default placement, meaning habitual users may continue using it.
Impact on Innovation
Google must share parts of its search index and user interaction data with qualified competitors, enabling smaller players to develop search engines and AI models.
This could accelerate generative AI innovation, though critics warn about potential privacy and security concerns.
What Google Can Do
Keep Chrome and Android; no forced divestiture.
Continue paid placement for non-exclusive search deals (limited to one-year contracts).
Develop Gemini AI and other search products without restriction.
Appeal the ruling; Google has already signaled plans to challenge both liability and remedies.
What Google Cannot Do
Sign exclusive default contracts for search.
Force Play Store licensing or revenue sharing based on other Google apps.
Block competitors’ access; must share search index and usage data under court oversight.
Ignore oversight; a technical committee will monitor compliance for six years.
The Bigger Picture
This ruling is among the most consequential antitrust decisions since the Microsoft case in the 1990s, reflecting the government’s push to rein in Big Tech while preserving innovation. With Google controlling nearly 90% of the global search market, competitors like DuckDuckGo argue the measures don’t go far enough. The case also sets a precedent for ongoing legal scrutiny of Meta, Amazon, and Apple.
Judge Mehta summarized the decision bluntly: “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.”
Related News
