​​Alphabet shares jumped 8% in after-hours trading on Tuesday after a federal judge declined to impose the harshest penalties in the landmark antitrust case against Google, easing investor concerns about the company’s future.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta rejected the Department of Justice’s call for Google to divest its Chrome browser or Android operating system, concluding those demands went beyond the case’s focus. “Google will not be required to divest Chrome; nor will the court include a contingent divestiture of the Android operating system in the final judgment,” the ruling stated. Mehta added that prosecutors “overreached” in seeking those remedies.
The decision marks a turning point in the most consequential tech antitrust trial in decades. In August 2024, the court found Google guilty of violating Section 2 of the Sherman Act by illegally maintaining a monopoly in search and related advertising. The remedies trial concluded in May, and final judgment is expected after a September 10 conference between the parties.
While the company avoided a breakup, Mehta did order restrictions aimed at curbing Google’s ability to lock up distribution channels. The company may still pay partners to preload products but cannot condition payments on exclusive contracts. The ruling also prohibits “compelled syndication” deals designed to guarantee Google’s search engine as the default on browsers and smartphones.
The Department of Justice welcomed the outcome. “The court’s ruling today recognizes the need for remedies that will pry open the market for general search services, which has been frozen in place for over a decade,” the DOJ said. Regulators also noted the remedies extend to generative AI products, warning against Google repeating past tactics in emerging technologies.
Google acknowledged the limits but expressed concern over user privacy and competitive impact. “Now the Court has imposed limits on how we distribute Google services, and will require us to share Search data with rivals,” the company said in a blog post. “We have concerns about how these requirements will impact our users and their privacy.”
The order requires Google to share certain search index and user interaction data with competitors, though not advertising data. Mehta stressed that access must be provided on “ordinary commercial terms” consistent with existing syndication practices.
The case also spotlighted Google’s multibillion-dollar deal with Apple to remain the default search engine on iPhones. Apple shares gained 4% after hours on news that such payments would not be banned. Mehta ruled that prohibiting all compensation for placement “almost certainly will impose substantial—in some cases, crippling—downstream harms” on distribution partners and consumers.
Though Google avoided the most severe remedies, the case still reshapes the rules for its search business and creates new oversight as tech giants expand into artificial intelligence.
Related Readings:
