After five years of courtroom wrangling and speculation about the future of Big Tech, a landmark antitrust ruling has landed squarely on Google’s doorstep. On September 2, 2025, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta issued a long-awaited decision that leaves Google’s core business intact but orders the company to open up its closely guarded search data to rivals—an unprecedented move in the world of online search.
The ruling, emerging from a marathon legal battle between Google and the U.S. Department of Justice, stops short of the government’s most aggressive proposals. Prosecutors had pushed for Google to be forced to sell off its Chrome web browser and even its Android operating system. But Judge Mehta found those remedies too drastic, writing in his 226-page decision that a breakup would be “a poor fit for this case” and “would be incredibly messy and highly risky.” Instead, Google must now share some of its search engine’s “secret sauce”—the data gleaned from trillions of queries—with “qualified competitors” in an effort to restore competition to what the judge called a “long-monopolized search market.”
The case, which began in 2020, centered on Google’s position as the default search engine on a vast array of devices, from its own Android smartphones and Chrome browser to Apple’s ubiquitous iPhones. At the heart of the dispute were Google’s multi-billion dollar agreements with device makers and browser developers—deals that saw the company pay over $26 billion in 2021 alone to ensure its search engine was preloaded or promoted. These deals, Judge Mehta ruled last year, had frozen competition and allowed Google to maintain an illegal monopoly in online search and related advertising.
Yet, in a twist that surprised some observers, Judge Mehta decided not to ban these default search deals outright. He reasoned that such a move could do “more harm than good,” especially as the technology landscape is rapidly changing. The rise of generative artificial intelligence—think OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Perplexity—has already begun to challenge Google’s dominance, he noted. “Here the court is asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future. Not exactly a judge’s forte,” Mehta wrote, acknowledging the difficulty of predicting how new technology might reshape the market.
Google, for its part, welcomed the ruling as a victory. “Today’s decision recognizes how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI, which is giving people so many more ways to find information,” the company said in a statement after the ruling, as reported by BBC. “This underlines what we’ve been saying since this case was filed in 2020: Competition is intense and people can easily choose the services they want.” However, Google also expressed reservations about the new data-sharing requirements, arguing that they could impact user privacy. “We have concerns about how these requirements will impact our users and their privacy, and we’re reviewing the decision closely,” the company told CBS News.
Investors seemed to breathe a collective sigh of relief. Shares in Alphabet, Google’s parent company, soared more than 7% in extended trading after the news broke, adding over $170 billion to its market value, according to Reuters. Apple, which receives more than $20 billion annually from Google for making its search engine the default on iPhones, also saw its shares rise 3%.
The implications of the ruling extend well beyond Google and Apple. Device makers like Samsung and Motorola, as well as wireless carriers such as AT&T and Verizon, are now free to preinstall or promote rival search engines, browsers, or AI assistants alongside Google’s products. The court also barred Google from entering into exclusive agreements that prevent device makers from offering alternatives. While Google’s most recent contracts already allowed for some rival offerings, the new order codifies and strengthens this requirement.
Not everyone is satisfied, however. DuckDuckGo, one of Google’s most vocal competitors, criticized the ruling for not going far enough. “The order failed to force the changes necessary to address Google’s illegal behaviour,” said DuckDuckGo founder and CEO Gabriel Weinberg, as quoted by BBC. “As a result, consumers will continue to suffer.” The Justice Department, too, is weighing its next steps. “Today’s remedy order agreed with the need to restore competition to the long-monopolized search market, and we are now weighing our options and thinking through whether the ordered relief goes far enough in serving that goal,” Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater wrote on social media.
The ruling’s focus on data sharing is seen as both a risk and an opportunity for the tech industry. By giving rivals access to Google’s vast trove of search data, the court hopes to level the playing field, allowing competitors to improve their own search results and advertising platforms. This could, in theory, spur innovation and provide consumers with more choices. But Google CEO Sundar Pichai warned during the trial that such measures could enable rivals to reverse-engineer Google’s technology, potentially undermining the company’s competitive edge.
Some analysts believe the impact will take time to play out. Deepak Mathivanan, an analyst for Cantor Fitzgerald, told Reuters that the data-sharing requirements “pose a competitive risk to Google but not right away. It will take a longer period of time for consumers to also embrace these new experiences.” Others, like Gene Munster of Deepwater Asset Management, see the ruling as “good news for big tech,” since it avoids the most severe remedies and allows lucrative default placement deals to continue—albeit with more oversight and annual renegotiations.
The story doesn’t end here. Google has indicated it plans to appeal the ruling, which could delay implementation for years and possibly send the case all the way to the Supreme Court. In the meantime, the company faces additional legal challenges: later this month, Google is set to go to trial in a separate case over its dominance in online advertising technology. The Justice Department’s campaign against Big Tech, launched during President Trump’s first term, has also ensnared Meta, Amazon, and Apple, signaling that the days of unchecked Silicon Valley power may be numbered.
For now, Google’s search engine remains the undisputed gateway to the internet for billions worldwide. But the ground beneath it is shifting. The rise of AI, the demands of regulators, and the ambitions of rivals are forcing even the mightiest tech giants to adapt—or risk losing their crown.
