Data-sharing to put more pressure on Google in the long run

• By opening Google’s data to competitors, the court is banking on strengthening future competition from both search engines and AI-driven tools.
• Device makers and browser partners like Apple may still set Google as the default, but must also provide alternative search engine options, regularly update their default settings, and promote competitors when relevant—for instance, in privacy modes.

Google scored a significant win in its ongoing legal tussle with US antitrust authorities, as a federal judge in Washington ruled that the tech giant would not have to sell its Chrome browser or its Android operating system.

However, the court imposed a new requirement: Google must share crucial data with competitors to enhance competition in the online search marketplace.

The decision sent waves through the tech and financial sectors. Shares of Alphabet, Google’s parent company, surged more than seven per cent in after-hours trading, as the threat of being forced to divest key assets was lifted.

Apple, which benefits handsomely from its partnership with Google, also saw its shares climb by over 3 per cent following the news. The judge’s ruling allows Google to continue its lucrative payments to Apple for making Google Search the default option on Apple devices—an arrangement that antitrust regulators argued effectively squeezed out rival search engines.

Judge Amit Mehta, overseeing the case, acknowledged that Google’s dominance in search and search advertising is illegal under antitrust law—a point he established in a previous decision from last year.

Yet, when it came to devising remedies, Mehta struck a cautious tone.

He noted in his opinion that rapid advancements in artificial intelligence are already reshaping the competitive landscape, perhaps more than any government intervention could.

Investors find reasons to celebrate

“Here the court is asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future. Not exactly a judge’s forte,” Mehta remarked. He pointed out that newcomers like OpenAI’s ChatGPT pose a viable threat to Google’s dominance, and by opening Google’s data to competitors, the court is banking on strengthening future competition from both search engines and AI-driven tools.

Still, analysts warn that the impact of these changes may not be immediate. The ruling also relieves Google of more drastic penalties. Divesting Chrome or Android would have struck at the heart of Google’s business, which depends heavily on driving user traffic to its money-spinning online ads.

Without such severe remedies, investors found reason to celebrate.

The judge further noted that prohibiting Google’s default search deals with Apple and other device makers would do more harm than good, particularly to those that rely on Google’s revenue-sharing payments.

Instead, the decision introduces a more nuanced approach: device makers and browser partners like Apple may still set Google as the default, but must also provide alternative search engine options, regularly update their default settings, and promote competitors when relevant—for instance, in privacy modes.

Google not out of the woods

Apple, which reportedly earns around $20 billion annually from Google for search placement, will continue reaping these rewards, while users maintain the flexibility to choose alternatives like Bing or DuckDuckGo.

Parties are already weighing next steps. The US Justice Department indicated it may appeal, while Google has voiced concerns about user privacy under the new data-sharing rules and hinted at a possible appeal that could stretch for years—eventually landing before the Supreme Court, according to legal experts.

The ruling doesn’t mean Google is out of the woods with regulators, either. The company faces separate lawsuits challenging its dominance in other digital markets, including app stores and advertising technology.

Mehta’s decision, meanwhile, is viewed as a measured response—recognising that the winds of technological change, driven especially by artificial intelligence, could upend the search market faster than any single court order.

So for now, the search giant holds fast to its core products. Its rivals gain new tools to compete. And the next big battleground for Big Tech may shift—as always—toward the unpredictable frontiers of innovation.