BALTIMORE, MD — Maryland Attorney General Anthony G. Brown, alongside a coalition of state attorneys general and the U.S. Department of Justice, is calling for sweeping measures to end Google’s illegal monopoly over internet search engines and restore competitive market conditions that benefit consumers.
The call for action follows a long-standing legal battle, beginning in December 2020, when Maryland joined a bipartisan group of states in filing a lawsuit accusing Google of unlawfully maintaining its dominance in the online search engine market through anticompetitive practices. This lawsuit was filed in addition to a federal antitrust suit the Justice Department had filed against Google in October 2020.
In August 2024, a federal district court in Washington, D.C., issued a landmark ruling, concluding that Google had violated federal antitrust laws by illegally maintaining a monopoly in online search and search text ads. This decision opened the door for potential remedies aimed at dismantling Google’s anticompetitive practices and restoring competition.
In response, the plaintiffs — including Maryland’s Attorney General — filed a proposed final judgment (PFJ) with the court, outlining a series of steps designed to level the playing field in the search engine market. The proposed remedies include:
- Ending Anticompetitive Distribution Contracts: Google would be prohibited from paying device manufacturers to make Google the default search engine on phones, browsers, and other devices. These payments, known as “exclusivity agreements,” are seen as a major factor in Google’s monopoly.
- Data Sharing: Google would be required to share data it has accumulated through its monopoly with its competitors. However, any data shared must be done so in a manner that protects users’ privacy and security.
- Sale of Key Assets: Google would be forced to sell its Chrome browser and, in some cases, the Android operating system. If these measures fail to adequately address the monopoly issue, or if Google does not comply with the remedies, the court could mandate the sale of Android as well.
- Greater Consumer Choice: The proposed judgment would prevent Google from making its search engine or AI tools mandatory on Android devices. Additionally, it would grant publishers the ability to opt out of having their data collected by Google to train its AI models or use it in generative AI outputs.
As part of the resolution, the states have proposed that Google fund a public education campaign to inform consumers about the company’s monopolistic practices, the legal ramifications, and the range of alternatives available for internet search. The campaign would aim to raise awareness about the competition that consumers have been deprived of due to Google’s actions.
Furthermore, the proposed order would establish a five-member technical committee, appointed by the court, to oversee the implementation, monitoring, and enforcement of these remedies for a period of 10 years.
The hearing on the proposed remedies is scheduled to begin on April 22, 2025, and is expected to conclude by May 2, 2025. If the court approves the proposed final judgment, the remedies could significantly reshape the online search landscape, restoring fair competition and increasing consumer choice.
The legal efforts against Google are part of a broader push by regulators to curb the power of Big Tech companies and ensure a competitive market for digital services. The outcome of this case could set important precedents for future antitrust actions targeting tech giants.
