Computing quotes Gareth Mills on a major antitrust case involving Google
min readA US court sided in 2024 with the US Department of Justice (DoJ) in concluding that search engine giant Google had conducted anti-competitive practice. A trial began this week (w/c 21 April 2025) that seeks to decide which remedies are appropriate to redress the competitive balance.
The DOJ said in a filing that Google forces Americans to submit to "unbridled demands and shifting, ideological preferences" to access a search tool.
Remedies could reportedly include breaking off parts of Google, such as Chrome or Android. In a blog post, the company indicated how it plans to fight back. Google has reportedly dropped a hint about how it intends to frame its case against US regulators, claiming that plans to dismantle the company would hurt US consumers and the wider economy.
Commenting on the trial, Gareth Mills, Partner in our Dispute Resolution team, explains in an article by Computing:
The DOJ’s stance does appear robust, but the likelihood of a swift resolution that requires Google to make sweeping changes to its business structure in the immediate term is remote. The DOJ’s position has definite echoes of the similarly robust stance taken against Microsoft in the 1990s concerning the emerging software market, which (despite an initial ruling stating that Microsoft should be split up) instead led to years of negotiation and appeals, with Microsoft eventually emerging intact, although subject to greater regulatory constraints via its settlement with the DOJ. It is also notable that in its submissions, Google has quoted the Microsoft case.
"That is not to minimise the importance of this case or the potential ramifications for Google, but anyone who expects a dramatic impact in the immediate term may be disappointed. The importance of AI and how its usage develops as an industry is, however, clearly of concern to the DOJ and other regulators such as the CMA but like many matters involving the current tech giants, it would be naïve not to at least acknowledge that economics and politics could be as compelling factors as black-letter competition law principles as this case develops.
Read the full article in Computing here.
Related coverage:
