Recently, Google has put forth a counterproposal amidst an antitrust lawsuit where the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) contended that Google should be compelled to divest its Chrome browser. In August, US District Court Judge Amit Mehta determined that Google had unlawfully preserved its dominance in online search, leading the DOJ to suggest several corrective measures. These included the potential sale of Chrome, the separation of its Android operating system, and a ban on inking exclusive search agreements with browser and smartphone enterprises.

On Friday, Google submitted an alternative plan, with Lee-Anne Mullholland, the company's Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, asserting in a blog post that the DOJ's suggestions represent an "interventionist approach" that "vastly oversteps the scope of the Court's ruling." Mullholland further argued that the "more significant issue is the DOJ's proposal would negatively impact American consumers and jeopardize the United States' global technological preeminence at a pivotal moment—such as by compelling us to disclose individuals' confidential search inquiries to both international and domestic competitors, and curtailing our capacity to innovate and enhance our offerings."

Conversely, Google has proposed that it should retain the liberty to negotiate search agreements with entities like Apple and Mozilla. However, these companies should have the prerogative to establish varying default settings across different platforms (e.g., iPhones versus iPads) and within distinct browsing contexts. Additionally, the company has suggested that Android device manufacturers should enjoy increased latitude in preloading a multiplicity of search engines, as well as in preloading Google applications without the necessity of including Google Search or Chrome.

Judge Mehta is anticipated to deliver a verdict on the proposed remedies in the forthcoming year, with a hearing penciled in for April. Mullholland indicated that Google is not only preparing to engage in negotiations regarding the remedies but also intends to challenge Judge Mehta's August ruling against the company. She elaborated, "Prior to lodging our appeal, the legal procedure necessitates that the parties delineate which remedies would most effectively address the Court's decision."

Anthony Ha, TechCrunch's weekend editor, formerly served as a technology reporter at Adweek, a senior editor at VentureBeat, a local government reporter at the Hollister Free Lance, and vice president of content at a venture capital firm. He is based in New York City. View Bio Most Popular Newsletters Subscribe for the industry’s most significant technology news Related Latest in Government & Policy.