The DOJ, along with several state antitrust enforcers, filed the recommendations with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, arguing that Google’s business strategies have limited innovation and unfairly excluded competitors from market opportunities. 

The agency also noted it will establish a court-appointed technical committee to oversee compliance with the proposed measures.  

Key Proposals to Break Monopoly

Among the remedies outlined, the DOJ called for Google to end exclusive agreements with companies such as Apple, where it pays billions annually to secure its search engine as the default on devices. 

Added to this, Google would be barred from using its Android operating system to strengthen its search dominance. Should other measures fail, the agency suggested Google sell Android entirely.  

Another recommendation involves mandating Google to license its search data to rivals at minimal costs and share user data, excluding information restricted by privacy regulations. The DOJ claims such measures would lower barriers for competitors and reinvigorate the search market.  

The filing further proposes that Google be prohibited from entering into exclusionary deals or acquiring search and advertising technology competitors. Websites would also have the option to opt out of contributing their data for Google’s artificial intelligence tools.  

Google’s Response

Google, however, said the proposals are excessive and detrimental. In a statement, Alphabet’s Chief Legal Officer, Kent Walker, described the measures as “radical overreach” that would harm users, developers, and small businesses while undermining the country’s technological edge.  

Walker argued that forcing the company to divest Chrome or Android could compromise user security and privacy. He also noted that such measures could negatively impact companies like Mozilla, which rely on partnerships with Google to sustain their services.  

Google maintained that its products, including Chrome and Android, are built on open-source frameworks, making them accessible to developers worldwide. The tech giant plans to file its counter-proposals in December.    

If the court adopts the DOJ’s recommendations, a five-member technical committee would oversee their implementation. This committee would have broad powers, including accessing Google’s internal documents and software code, to ensure compliance.  

The DOJ’s filing claims that Google has created a “perpetual feedback loop” by leveraging its dominant platforms to attract more users, gather extensive data, and increase advertising revenue. Breaking this cycle, prosecutors argue, is critical to restoring competition in the market.  

The trial to determine the final remedies is scheduled for April 2025.

This follows an August ruling that determined Google had unlawfully monopolised the search engine market.  

According to insiders, the DOJ will request that U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who presided over the earlier case, impose additional remedies targeting Google’s Android operating system and its artificial intelligence practices. 

This is one of the most significant moves by the Biden administration to rein in Big Tech’s influence over digital markets.  

Chrome, which commands nearly two-thirds of the global browser market, is at the heart of Google’s advertising empire. Its integration with Google Search and its ability to collect user data have been critical in bolstering the company’s dominance in online advertising. 

Reports reveal that Chrome’s pervasive presence limits competition, while Google maintains that its products succeed based on quality and consumer choice.  

In a statement, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president for Regulatory Affairs, described the DOJ’s proposals as part of a “radical agenda” that risks harming consumers rather than promoting competition. 

Google plans to appeal any final rulings it finds unfavourable, with Judge Mehta expected to deliver a decision on remedies by August 2025.  

Potential corrective measures include ending agreements in which Google pays substantial sums to device makers like Apple to make its search engine the default option.

Again, the DOJ is considering requiring Google to provide advertisers with greater control over where their ads appear and more options for content creators to limit their materials from being used in Google’s AI products.  

The DOJ may reserve the Google Chrome divestiture as a last resort if other measures fail to create a competitive marketplace. 

Meanwhile, Google insists its search engine faces competition from platforms like Amazon and that users retain the freedom to switch to alternative browsers or search engines.  

A trial on the proposed remedies is scheduled for April 2025.