Last year, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) made a court filing demanding that Google divest Chrome and even Android to end its anti-competitive practices. Today, United States District Court Judge Amit P. Mehta issued the final ruling based on the filings from the DOJ, Google, and others.
Here"s the summary of the judgment:
- DOJ wanted Google to be barred from signing exclusive contracts with Apple, OEMs, publishers, etc.
- This request was granted in part. Google is barred from entering or maintaining any "exclusive" contracts relating to the distribution of Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, or the Gemini app. Also prohibited are agreements that:
- Tie Play Store licensing to the distribution/placement of Search, Chrome, Assistant, or Gemini.
- Condition revenue-share payments for one app on distributing another.
- Condition revenue-share payments on keeping Search, Chrome, Assistant, or Gemini on devices for more than a year.
- Prevent partners from also distributing rival search engines, browsers, or GenAI products.
- This request was granted in part. Google is barred from entering or maintaining any "exclusive" contracts relating to the distribution of Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, or the Gemini app. Also prohibited are agreements that:
- DOJ wanted possible Android divestiture and mandatory Chrome divestiture.
- The court ruled against the divestiture of Android or Chrome. The court found that Google did not use these assets unlawfully.
- DOJ wanted Google to be barred from paying billions to Apple or OEMs to remain the default.
- Google can continue payments for preloading/placement of Search, Chrome, or GenAI apps. The court said banning payments would harm distribution partners, related markets, and consumers. Mozilla, for example, cannot survive without its Google search deal.
- DOJ wanted Google to share its search index, ranking signals, query understanding, ads data, and user/ad data for 10 years with rivals.
- The court ruled that Google must share certain search index and user-interaction data with “Qualified Competitors.”
- Ads data need not be shared.
- DOJ wanted Google to share data related to its ad business to enable rivals to compete.
- The court ruled that Google must offer Qualified Competitors search and search-ads syndication services on commercial terms, consistent with its current practices.
- DOJ wanted Google to be barred from acquiring or investing in companies working on search, ads, or AI.
- The court ruled that no investment reporting or acquisition restrictions are required.
You can read the complete judgment here. Overall, Google must be very happy with the ruling, as it does not change the status quo in any meaningful way. Google’s stock is already up 7% after hours because of this decision. Several rivals, such as DuckDuckGo, have publicly expressed their dissatisfaction with the outcome.
A statement from our CEO on the US v Google remedies:
— DuckDuckGo (@DuckDuckGo) September 2, 2025
"We do not believe the remedies ordered by the court will force the changes necessary to adequately address Google’s illegal behavior. Google will still be allowed to continue to use its monopoly to hold back competitors,…
While the decision prevents Google from locking partners into exclusive agreements, it still allows the company to pursue default placement deals. It remains to be seen whether the DOJ will appeal this judgment in the days ahead.