Filings: the US DOJ drops a bid to force Google to sell its AI investments to boost search competition but still seeks a court order requiring it to sell Chrome
an important search access point—to provide an opportunity for a new rival to operate a significant gateway to search the internet, free of Google's monopoly control.” Anna Langlois / @_annalanglois : NEW: DOJ's final remedy proposal for Google is in. Keeping bid for Chrome divestiture and search default agreement ban, but dropping requests to block Google's investments in AI companies Anna Langlois / @_annalanglois : Instead, the Trump Admin is asking the court to require Google to alert them to future AI investments. The DOJ and states are still concerned about “Google's potential to use its sizable capital to exercise influence in AI companies” Rat King / @mikeisaac : kids are wearing jncos, elon is tweeting DOGE memes, Digg is relaunching and now comes the return of the browser wars we are back in Web 2.0 — somebody call myspace tom Zamaan Qureshi / @zamaan_qureshi : A big step towards curtailing Google's illegal monopoly power. Forums: r/neoliberal : The DOJ Still Wants Google to Sell Off Chrome r/degoogle : DOJ Reinforces Demand to Break Up Google's Search Monopoly r/firefox : DOJ Reinforces Demand to Break Up Google's Search Monopoly r/politics : Justice Dept. Doubles Down on Request to Break Up Google r/technology : Justice Dept. Doubles Down on Request to Break Up Google r/politics : Justice Dept. Doubles Down on Request to Break Up Google r/neoliberal : Justice Dept. Doubles Down on Request to Break Up Google
ReutersJody Godoy
Context & Ripple Effects
The remedy fight has narrowed rather than disappeared. The DOJ’s earlier proposal to divest Chrome and curb default-search deals put control of search entry points at the center of the case; Google subsequently proposed allowing browser companies to strike multiple default agreements across platforms in its own remedy plan.
The final filing retains the distribution-focused demands while replacing a forced sale of AI investments with advance notification of future investments. That distinction matters because it separates immediate search-access remedies from oversight of Google’s potential influence in AI.
First-order effects
Google still faces a proposed Chrome divestiture and a ban on search default agreements, remedies aimed directly at its control over major routes into search.
The DOJ abandons the requested forced disposal of Google’s AI investments, but seeks notice of future AI investments, preserving scrutiny without requiring an immediate unwind.
Second-order effects
Browser makers, operating-system providers and prospective search rivals would gain more room to negotiate or operate search access points if the default-deal restrictions or Chrome sale are ordered by the court.
AI companies considering capital from Google would face a more visible regulatory process, while avoiding the immediate disruption that mandatory divestiture would have created.
Third-order effects
The proposal signals an antitrust remedy model centered on contesting distribution choke points—browsers, defaults and platform placement—rather than broadly separating a dominant company from adjacent technology investments.
If courts endorse this approach, AI investment oversight may become a continuing condition around platform power, though the practical effect will depend on the eventual order and enforcement.
The trend: Search antitrust enforcement is shifting toward restructuring how users reach search while placing lighter but continuing scrutiny on dominant platforms’ AI expansion.
As you read DOJ is doubling down on breaking up Google, don't forget Google Search can barely hold 90% of market now and ChatGPT is *estimated* to approach 1%. Absurd things when you stop and think. [video]
“To the extent there were concerns about continuity in the prosecution of this case, we're proud to see ongoing bipartisan commitment to robust antitrust enforcement.” On final search cases remedies, @LeeHepner says “the antitrust agenda against Big Tech is here to stay.”👇 [image…
Also, weirdly, DOJ *deleted* its request for attorneys' fees. ("costs" do not encompass fees). This is super weird and seems bad in light of DOGE budget cuts - why *wouldn't* you seek money from a monopolistic wrongdoer to keep antitrust enforcement going strong? [image]
DOJ (overall) stays STRONG on seeking remedies for Google's illegal tactics to maintain search monopoly in final proposal before remedies hearing in late April ✅ restricts corporate bribery that prevents competition ✅ divests Chrome browser More thoughts & caveats in 🧵 [image]
The Trump 45 Justice Department brought this crucial antitrust lawsuit against Google for its illegal search monopoly. Now the Trump 47 Justice Department, under acting antitrust chief Omeed Assefi, just issued the final blow against Google. https://storage.courtlistener.com/ ...…
Bam. Tip of hat to DOJ for not waiting until midnight to post its final proposed remedies for US v Google I. Plus, DOJ posted an exec summary and redline version. Bravo. All as expected including Chrome divestiture and future proofing for AI. Here is what publishers came for: [im…
DOJ: “Google must divest the Chrome browser—an important search access point—to provide an opportunity for a new rival to operate a significant gateway to search the internet, free of Google's monopoly control.”
NEW: DOJ's final remedy proposal for Google is in. Keeping bid for Chrome divestiture and search default agreement ban, but dropping requests to block Google's investments in AI companies
Instead, the Trump Admin is asking the court to require Google to alert them to future AI investments. The DOJ and states are still concerned about “Google's potential to use its sizable capital to exercise influence in AI companies”
kids are wearing jncos, elon is tweeting DOGE memes, Digg is relaunching and now comes the return of the browser wars we are back in Web 2.0 — somebody call myspace tom