Google faces most serious threat that could split it’s core businesses

Google faces its gravest antitrust threat in decades as two U.S. judges have already ruled the company an unlawful monopolist in search and online advertising, and a trial opening Monday will decide the tech giant’s future.

Last year, a federal judge found Google illegally dominated the online search market. This past week, another judge ruled it had also monopolized digital advertising technology. Before Google can appeal either decision, both judges will hold separate remedies trials that could force the company to spin off products and end deals.

According to a report by The Verge, the first remedies trial begins Monday in Washington, D.C., and is scheduled to run for three weeks.

The U.S. Department of Justice will ask Judge Mehta to order Google to sell the Chrome web browser, share its valuable search‑query data, notify the government of future artificial‑intelligence investments, and abandon exclusive distribution contracts with phone and browser makers. Google says those contracts help users and that it plans to contest any penalties after the trials finish.

Mehta, however, has already ruled that Google’s tactics were unlawful, so the company now argues only about scope. The judge could opt for narrower steps, but the DOJ insists firm measures are needed to restore competition and prevent Google from rebuilding monopoly power. Nothing on this scale has confronted a U.S. tech company since Microsoft’s antitrust loss 25 years ago.

Google’s defenses in Washington look thin

Overseas, Google has paid fines and tweaked products to meet European and other regulations. None of those cases asked for break‑ups. In Washington, the stakes are higher.

This involves ending Google’s search‑distribution pact with Apple could dismantle one of Silicon Valley’s richest partnerships, and rivals such as Microsoft could gain access to search‑query logs they have long lacked.

During last autumn’s liability phase, Google maintained it won users by offering better products. The court rejected that claim. Now, executives from Google Search, Android, and Chrome, as well as leaders from DuckDuckGo, Microsoft’s Bing, Yahoo, OpenAI, and Perplexity are expected to testify.

The government will ask them to describe how the proposed fixes might open the market. Google will counter that forced divestitures could hurt consumers who rely on its integrated tools.

Prosecutors say Google’s exclusive placement as the default engine on Apple devices and its control of Chrome block even quality competitors from gaining traction. Because Google processes billions of queries daily, it receives feedback data that smaller players cannot match.

The DOJ wants any remedy to be future‑proof, especially as AI chatbots start answering search questions. It once sought to make Google sell AI holdings outright; today, it only asks for advance notice of major AI investments.

Judge Brinkema, in Alexandria, Virginia, has not scheduled the ad‑tech remedies phase, but it is expected in the coming months. She agreed with the DOJ that Google tied together two critical services, its publisher ad server (DFP) and its ad exchange (AdX), to lock in dominance.

Splitting off one or both businesses is seen as the simplest cure. Though less dramatic than losing Chrome, a breakup here would reshape how websites earn revenue beyond large social networks, an area publishers told the court was subject to “Google’s whims.”

Mehta could issue a search‑remedy order by late summer. Brinkema’s court, nicknamed the “rocket docket” for its speed, could also finish this year. Yet real change may take longer. Google has pledged to appeal, potentially to the Supreme Court, a process that could delay divestitures for years.

Cryptopolitan Academy: Coming Soon - A New Way to Earn Passive Income with DeFi in 2025. Learn More