The American government plans to ask a judge to force Google to sell its Chrome browser, according to the Bloomberg agency. Such a sanction against the technology giant, found guilty of anti-competitive practices in the management of its famous search engine, would be historic.
The Ministry of Justice also plans to demand measures concerning new generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools and its Android mobile operating system, according to anonymous sources close to the matter cited Monday by the news agency.
Google responded in a press release on Tuesday, arguing that the Justice Department was putting forward a radical agenda that goes well beyond the legal issues in this case and that would harm consumers and businesses.
For the government to put its thumb on the scale in this way would harm consumers, developers, and America’s technology leadership just when it needs it most.
A quote from Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google Vice President of Legal
This summer, Google was found guilty of illegal practices to establish and maintain its monopoly in online search.
It was Washington federal judge Amit Mehta who made this decision. He could rule on the sentence in August 2025, after receiving the official request from authorities in November and hearing from both sides at a special hearing in April.
The possibility of demanding a Google split marks a profound shift by U.S. competition authorities, who have largely left the tech giants alone since their failure to break up Microsoft 20 years ago.
Open in full screen mode
Chrome is Google’s browser.
Photo : Google
The ministry wants Google to divest itself of Chrome, the world’s most widely used Internet browser, because it provides a major access point to the search engine, undermining the chances of potential competitors.
According to the StatCounter website, in September Google accounted for 90% of the global online search market and even 94% on smartphones.
Other changes in sight?
Anti-competitive authorities should also propose that Google dissociate Android from its other products, notably the search engine and the Google Play mobile application store, according to the Bloomberg agency.
The government also wants to act on the research results formulated by generative AI, called AI Overviews, which directly answer Internet users’ questions without them having to click on links.
Open in full screen mode
The AI Overview tool answers Internet users’ questions about the Google search engine.
Photo : Google
Many websites complain of a drop in traffic and Google’s rivals in online search believe that this new format gives them no chance of emerging.
The ten weeks of trial revealed the staggering sums paid by the Alphabet subsidiary to ensure the default installation of Google Search, particularly on smartphones manufactured by Apple and Samsung.
The prosecutions were launched during the administration of Donald Trump and continued under the presidency of Joe Biden.
If the judge accepts the authorities’ proposals, they could reshape the online search market and the booming generative AI industry.
But the changes, if they happen, will likely take years, with Google planning to appeal.
Asked by Agence France-Presse (AFP) on Monday, the Department of Justice did not comment.
With information from Agence France-Presse and Reuters
From an antitrust perspective, the justification for such a drastic measure hinges on the extent to which Google’s practices restrict competition and harm consumers. If the government can demonstrate that Google is using its control over Chrome to reinforce its monopoly in search, then the intervention could be seen as necessary to restore competitive dynamics. However, we must also consider the potential ramifications on innovation and the broader tech ecosystem. Therefore, while the move may be justified under certain conditions, it’s essential to weigh the potential benefits against drawbacks comprehensively
Welcome to World Today News’ exclusive interview with two experts on the ongoing discussions about the American government’s plans to force Google to sell its Chrome browser and make other significant changes to its operations. Our first guest is Dr. Sarah Johnson, a Technology Innovation Strategist with extensive experience in the tech industry. Dr. Johnson has worked with multiple Fortune 500 companies, advising them on their digital transformation initiatives.
Our second guest is Dr. Alex Smith, an Antitrust Law Professor at Harvard Law School, who specializes in competition policy and regulation in the information economy. Dr. Smith has testified before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary and the Federal Trade Commission on various matters related to antitrust law.
We start by asking Dr. Johnson about her thoughts on the potential sale of Google Chrome and the impact it could have on the tech industry.
**Q1:** Dr. Johnson, what potential benefits could forcing Google to sell Chrome have for consumers and the tech industry? Do you think this could lead to greater innovation and competition in the browser market?
**Dr. Johnson:** Well, certainly, if Google were forced to sell Chrome, it could open up the browser market to more competition and potentially lead to better choices for consumers. Chrome is currently the dominant browser with a market share of over 60%, so any decrease in its dominance could lead to new features, improved security, and maybe even lower prices for consumers. Additionally, we might see new entrants into the browser market that could offer unique features or user experiences that are currently lacking.
However, forcing Google to sell Chrome could also have unintended consequences. For one, it could harm their search business, as Google Search is deeply integrated into Chrome and users may not switch to an alternative search engine if they have to switch browsers. Furthermore, the potential breakup of a company like Google could stifle innovation as smaller companies may struggle to compete with the resources and reach of larger, more established players.
**Q2:** Dr. Smith, from an antitrust perspective, is the proposed action by the American government justified? What role does the monopoly status of Google Search play in this decision?
**Dr. Smith:** Monopoly power in the internet search market is a significant concern for antitrust authorities, as
![[VIDÉOS] Large debts to pay: a fake conspiracy lawyer declared a vexatious litigator](https://m1.quebecormedia.com/emp/emp/Capture_d_e_cran_le_2024_11_19_a_14.16.33c69bce00-2e2d-4765-b21d-8e2cdd001e3f_ORIGINAL.jpg?impolicy=crop-resize&x=0&y=0&w=1591&h=1066&width=400 "[VIDÉOS] Large debts to pay: a fake conspiracy lawyer declared a vexatious litigator")