The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) reaffirms its position that Google should divest its web browser, Chrome, as outlined in a recent court filing.
Despite the change in administration, with the DOJ having first suggested the divestiture under then-President Joe Biden, it remains firm under the subsequent Trump administration. The DOJ’s proposal maintains the core requirement for Google to sell Chrome to address antitrust concerns. However, it has revised its stance on Google’s artificial intelligence investments.
The DOJ initially called for Google to divest all AI investments, including significant resources allocated to companies like Anthropic. This position has been adjusted, with the DOJ now requiring Google to provide prior notification for future AI investments, rather than enforcing mandatory divestiture.
Omeed Assefi, the acting attorney general for antitrust at the DOJ, highlighted Google’s practices in maintaining dominance in the tech market. Assefi criticized Google’s actions as creating an economic giant that undermines competition, enabling the company to remain victorious irrespective of market conditions.
Related Stories
The DOJ continues to propose prohibiting Google from making search-related payments to distribution partners to curtail its grip on internet search dominance. Meanwhile, the approach to Google’s Android division remains undecided, with future decisions contingent on the competitive landscape.
This ongoing legal strategy follows antitrust lawsuits by both the DOJ and 38 state attorneys general. These suits led Judge Amit P. Mehta to rule that Google had acted illegally to maintain its search monopoly. Although Google plans to appeal Mehta’s ruling, the DOJ’s proposals, described by a Google spokesperson as overly broad and detrimental to national interests, remain on the table.
The DOJ’s unwavering stance on the divestiture of Chrome, coupled with a more lenient approach to AI investments, signals a focused yet flexible strategy in addressing antitrust issues with Google. As legal proceedings continue, the outcomes will shape the competitive dynamics of the tech industry.
