DOJ demands Google sell Chrome as antitrust case heats up

I don’t love what’s happening with the DOJ, Google and the Chrome browser right now. The Department of Justice has doubled down on its demand that Google sell off its Chrome browser as a key component of its proposed remedy in the ongoing antitrust case. This isn’t just a minor suggestion; it’s a core piece of their strategy to address what they see as Google’s monopolistic control over the search market.  

The DOJ’s filing underscores their belief that Google’s dominance, bolstered by its control of Chrome and its lucrative deals with partners for default search placement, stifles competition and ultimately harms consumers. They argue that Google’s “illegal conduct” has created an “economic goliath” that ensures its continued dominance, regardless of market dynamics.  

Beyond the Chrome divestiture, the DOJ is also pushing for Google to cease its practice of paying partners (namely, Apple) for preferential search engine placement. This move aims to level the playing field, allowing smaller search engines to compete without facing the financial hurdles imposed by Google’s massive payouts.  

Interestingly, while the initial proposal included potential divestiture of AI investments, the final filing now focuses on requiring Google to provide prior notification of any new joint ventures, collaborations, or partnerships in the search or search text ad spaces. This shift suggests a recognition of AI’s critical role in future innovation, while still maintaining oversight to prevent anti-competitive practices.

Google is pushing back

Google, predictably, is pushing back hard. They argue that their success stems from offering the best search technology and that consumers have the freedom to choose their default search engine. They characterize the DOJ’s proposals as “sweeping” and harmful to consumers, the economy, and national security.  

The company’s counter-proposal, which suggests alternative remedies like restructuring contracts with partners and allowing more flexibility for Android phone makers, indicates a willingness to compromise on some fronts. However, Google remains steadfast in its opposition to divestitures and restrictions on its AI investments.  

The crux of the issue, as highlighted by the court’s ruling, lies in Google’s contracts with device makers and browser partners. These agreements, which secure Google as the default search engine on a vast majority of devices, create a significant barrier to entry for competitors.  

As this case moves forward, it’s clear that the stakes are high. The outcome will not only reshape Google’s business practices but also have far-reaching implications for the broader tech industry. The DOJ’s “maximalist opening position,” as some experts suggest, could lead to significant negotiations and compromises.

Carts and horses in their order

It’s important here to not put the cart before the horse, even when the DOJ’s demands seem so scary. Even if Google is forced to sell off Chrome, what company would have the type of cash necessary to make that purchase, and how would such a well-funded organization be a better option than Google for maintaining the world’s most popular browser?

I think it is very important to remember that this case is far from over, and Google will be throwing everything they have at this over the next few months. There’s clearly room for negotiation, and we’re hoping that means the Chrome browser gets to stay with Google when all is said and done. The alternative still doesn’t make sense to me at all.

If a search monopoly is the big concern here, why not just force Google to surface the choice of search engine early and often, making it abundantly clear and dead-simple for users to choose (or not choose) Google Search? Whether it is in the Chrome browser, Android, or anywhere else, if the issue comes down to Google having a search monopoly, why not just force them to get that choice in front of users far more blatantly – regardless of who owns Chrome?

Ultimately, my opinion won’t sway much in this case, but I’m hoping saner heads prevail. I still think Google has a monopoly because they offer the best product that people choose on a daily basis. I have to use a Windows machine for our golf simulator, and somehow my search engine – in the Chrome browser, mind you – ended up back on Bing the other day. And it is objectively terrible to use.

I assume it happened when one of our members at Proof Golf Club used Chrome to look up something and Windows pushed them to use Bing instead of Chrome. So, if it is that easy to get general users over to another search engine within Google’s own browser, this idea of Chrome holding some sort of magical sway over which search engine users decide to use seems pretty silly to me. People use Google Search because it is a superior product, and selling off a browser won’t change that.