Sept. 2 (UPI) -- Google will not be forced to sell off Chrome or its Android operating system, but will have to share some of its search engine data with competitors, among other remedies, a federal court ruled Tuesday in an antitrust case that found the U.S. tech giant maintained an illegal monopoly in the search engine industry.
The ruling from Judge Amit Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia is a far cry from the punishment the Justice Department had sought, instead ruling in favor of part of the remedies put forth by both sides.
While federal prosecutors had hoped for Google to be forced to divest from Chrome browser and Android, Mehta ruled that the tech behemoth may maintain ownership of those services but will be barred from entering contracts that make them -- along with other products, such as its Gemini assistant -- exclusive services for interacting with the Internet or for use on devices. The ruling, though, does allow it to make payments to distribution partners for reloading Google products.
Though many of the Justice Department's requests were turned aside, it did force Google to make available some specific sets of search and other data to rivals.
The 226-page memorandum opinion ends a multiyear legal saga that began in 2020 when federal prosecutors accused Google of maintaining its search engine monopoly through illegal antitrust practices.
A federal judge in August 2024 agreed, ruling: "Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly."
In his Tuesday memorandum on remedies in the case, Mehta said the emergence of artificial intelligence since litigation began had affected the course of litigation, and his ruling reflects that.
"These remedies proceedings thus have been as much about promoting competition among GSEs as ensuring that Google's dominance in search does not carry over into the Gen AI space," he said, referring to general search engines by their initialism.
Mehta added that in crafting the remedies the court did so with "a healthy dose of humility" as "it has no expertise in the business of GSEs, the buying and selling of search and text ads or the engineering of Gen AI technologies.
"And, unlike the typical case where the court's job is to resolve a dispute based on historic facts, here the court is asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future," he said. "Not exactly a judge's forte."
Google has said that it has taken action to rectify the issues the court previously found illegal and had stated the only remedy appropriate was to bar it from exclusive contracts, arguing that to impose further conditions, especially affecting the Gen AI technology space, would unfairly hinder its ability to compete.
The tech behemoth had disagreed with the August 2024 ruling, and following the memorandum on Tuesday said it recognized the impact AI was having on its industry.
"Now the court has imposed limits on how we distribute Google services, and will require us to share search data with rivals. We have concerns about how these requirements will impact our users and their privacy," Lee-Anne Mulholland, vice president of regulatory affairs at Google, said in a statement.
"The court did recognize that divesting Chrome and Android would have gone beyond the case's focus on search distribution and would have harmed consumers and our partners."
Meanwhile, Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the ruling as a victory.
"This decision marks an important step forward in the Department of Justice's ongoing fight to protect American consumers," she said in a statement.