Washington, DC, December 22 – Alphabet’s Google has proposed modifications to its agreements with Apple and other partners to loosen its grip as the default search engine on new devices, aiming to address a U.S. antitrust ruling that found the tech giant unlawfully dominates the online search market.

The proposal stops short of the government’s more aggressive demand to force Google to divest its Chrome browser. Google has argued that such a drastic measure would harm competition and innovation in the search industry.

Google’s Proposal: A Narrower Remedy

In its court filing, Google urged U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta to exercise caution in deciding remedies for the company’s dominance in online search and advertising. Google emphasized the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligencewhich it claims is reshaping user interactions with search engines and other digital services.

Google’s proposed remedies focus on revising its distribution agreements with:

• Browser developers
• Mobile device manufacturers
• Wireless carriers

The agreements, deemed problematic by Judge Mehta, currently make Google the default search engine on most U.S. devices, providing it with an unseen but significant advantage over competitors.

To address these concerns, Google’s proposal includes:

• Making agreements with browser developers non-exclusive.
• Allowing Android phone manufacturers to access the Google Play Store without being forced to pre-install Google Chrome or Search.
• Letting browser developers revisit their default search engine decisions annually.

Revenue Sharing Agreements: A Key Difference

Google’s proposal notably preserves its revenue-sharing agreementswhich allocate a portion of advertising revenue generated through searches to device and software companies.

For instance, Apple reportedly received $20 billion in 2022 under its agreement with Google. Similarly, smaller browser developers like Mozilla depend on these funds to sustain operations.

In contrast, the U.S. government seeks to dismantle these revenue-sharing agreements, arguing they perpetuate Google’s dominance and suppress competition.

Kamyl Bazbaz, spokesperson for rival search engine DuckDuckGocriticized Google’s approach, stating,
“The remedy must not only stop the illegal conduct and prevent its recurrence but also restore competition in the affected markets.”

The Road Ahead: A Pivotal Trial in April

The case now moves to a remedies trial in Aprilwhere the U.S. Department of Justice and state attorneys general will argue for broader measures. Proposed remedies include:

• Forcing Google to sell Chrome and potentially its Android operating system.
• Ending Google’s practice of paying to be the default search engine.
• Halting investments in rival search engines and AI query-based products.
• Licensing Google’s search results and technology to competitors.

The government aims to foster competition by enabling rivals to gather sufficient search data to improve their products and to prevent Google from leveraging its dominance in search to control the emerging AI landscape.