Judge Weighs AI-Focused Remedies in Google Search Monopoly Case

In the closing arguments of the Justice Department's antitrust case against Google, a central focus has been on Google's role in the emerging field of artificial intelligence (AI) and how it relates to search dominance. The DOJ argued for broad remedies, including forcing Google to sell its Chrome browser and share search data with AI competitors, to prevent the company from monopolizing AI-powered search tools like its Gemini product. Google countered by emphasizing existing competition in AI from companies such as OpenAI and proposed more limited remedies that would only bar exclusive agreements deemed anticompetitive. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta expressed skepticism toward both sides' proposals and questioned how AI fits into the legal framework of the search market. The government’s lead attorney dismissed Google's remedy suggestions as insufficient to change the status quo, warning that generative AI could further entrench Google's market power. The final ruling will determine whether Google faces a breakup or more constrained penalties, underscoring the court's challenge in addressing the evolving impact of AI on the internet and search industry.