Judge Mehta imposes new limits on Google’s conduct in U.S. antitrust case

New Delhi: Google’s long-running antitrust dispute in the United States has moved into a new stage, with U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta issuing detailed conditions that expand on the penalties the company must follow after being found to hold an illegal monopoly in internet search, according to a news report.

Google was ruled in 2024 to have violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by maintaining a monopoly in search and search advertising. The Justice Department had argued for stronger remedies, including a forced divestiture of the Chrome browser, but the court rejected those proposals earlier this year. Instead, Google was ordered to loosen control over search data and revise its handling of key commercial arrangements.

The latest filings set out practical restrictions. Judge Mehta wrote that Google can no longer enter into long-term default search agreements such as its multibillion-dollar arrangement with Apple unless those contracts are capped at one year. 

The same limitation applies across Google’s wider ecosystem and covers agreements involving generative AI products and any software or service built on large language models.

“GenAI plays a significant role in these remedies,” Mehta noted, indicating that the court’s oversight now extends to Google’s emerging AI tools and their potential competitive impact.

The order also outlines the creation of a technical committee that will supervise Google’s data-sharing requirements. Members must bring expertise in areas including AI, software engineering, information retrieval, behavioural science, economics and data privacy, and must avoid conflicts of interest. The committee will have access to Google’s source code and algorithms under confidentiality obligations.

A key condition remains the requirement that Google share portions of its raw search interaction data with eligible competitors. The company is not required to provide its ranking algorithms, but Mehta argued that even limited access to data could help rival search engines strengthen their models and reduce the gap created by Google’s long-standing market position.

The ruling reinforces the court’s intention to place substantive checks on Google’s influence without dismantling its products. Google has said it intends to appeal the monopoly finding and has not issued further comment on the updated conditions.