Google fails to delay search data-sharing order in monopolistic case
A federal judge has denied Alphabet Inc.’s request to halt an order mandating the tech giant to grant competitors access to its underlying search data, as the company appeals a ruling that it unlawfully monopolized the online search market. In a ruling issued on Thursday, US District Judge Amit Mehta rejected Google’s request for the time being, stating that any data sharing is at least months away and thus the company faces no imminent threat of harm. “As of today, neither the court nor the parties have any concrete point of reference for the harms the data-sharing and syndication provisions may precipitate,” Mehta stated.
The government’s “rosy estimate of when these remedies will be available to qualified competitors likely depends on relatively conflict-free negotiations of licensing terms and certifying competitors, which is far from assured.” A Washington judge stated that the Justice Department and state attorneys general, who initiated the lawsuit, are required to inform the court 45 days prior to any commencement of data sharing, allowing Google the opportunity to renew its request to pause the ruling. In August 2024, Mehta determined that the company had unlawfully monopolized the search market by entering into contracts with Apple Inc. and other smartphone manufacturers like Samsung Electronics Co., which mandated the use of its search engine as the default option. The judge determined that those deals, for which Google paid over $20 billion each year, obstructed competitors from essential distribution channels.
Following a second trial in 2025, Mehta dismissed a request from the Justice Department and numerous state attorneys general to compel the sale of Google’s Chrome web browser. He maintained that Google may persist in financing its search engine and AI applications as the default choice; however, it was necessary for the agreements to be rebid annually to provide competitors with greater chances to contend. The judge mandated that the company provide a one-time snapshot of its search data to select competitors, facilitating their efforts to develop rival search engines or artificial intelligence products.
Implementing Mehta’s ruling will be a considerable challenge. The parties are presently engaged in establishing a technical committee that will supervise the process, with two positions in that body yet to be filled, as stated in Mehta’s ruling. The plaintiffs estimate that any data sharing with competitors may be possible in the fall or winter, Mehta stated. The DOJ, states, and Google are anticipated to submit briefs regarding the appeal by the end of October. A date for a hearing has yet to be established.
