Judge Mehta adds new restrictions to Google’s antitrust penalties, including limits on AI and default search deals

Google

Google’s long-running U.S. antitrust battle has moved into its next phase, with U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta issuing detailed conditions that expand on the penalties the company will face following its defeat in the landmark search monopoly case.

Google was ruled in 2024 to have violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by maintaining an illegal monopoly in search and search advertising. While the Justice Department had pushed for far harsher remedies, including a forced divestiture of the Chrome browser, the court rejected those proposals earlier this year. Instead, Google was ordered to loosen its grip on search data and change how it handles key commercial arrangements.

The new filings released on Friday spell out the practical consequences. Judge Mehta wrote that Google can no longer enter into long-term default search deals like the multibillion-dollar agreement it maintains with Apple unless those contracts are limited to a maximum of one year. This restriction also applies to similar arrangements across Google’s ecosystem and covers not just search, but generative AI products and any software or service involving large language models.

“GenAI plays a significant role in these remedies,” Mehta noted, underscoring that the court’s scrutiny now extends into Google’s emerging AI products and their competitive impact.

The order also details the formation of a technical committee that will oversee Google’s data-sharing obligations. Members must be specialists across fields such as AI, software engineering, information retrieval, behavioural science, economics and data privacy, and must avoid any conflicts of interest. Committee members will have access to Google’s source code and algorithms under strict confidentiality.

One of the central obligations remains the requirement that Google share portions of its raw search interaction data with qualified competitors. While the company will not be forced to hand over its ranking algorithms, Mehta argued that even a limited data set can help rival search engines improve their models and narrow the gap created by Google’s years of accumulated advantage.

The judge’s latest ruling reinforces the court’s intention to place meaningful checks on Google’s market power while stopping short of dismantling its products. Google has previously said it will appeal the monopoly ruling and did not provide new comment on the updated remedies.