In a proposal that could radically change the Internet, the Ministry of Justice looking to break up Google – by forcing it to sell the popular Chrome browser – in order to end its monopoly on search.

The DOJ request comes after a judge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia concluded in August that Google was a monopoly and Internet giant broke the law by signing multi-billion dollar contracts to make its search engine the default search engine on web browsers and smartphones, including Apple and Samsung devices.

“Google must divest Chrome, which has ‘reinforced (Google’s) dominance’…so that its competitors can pursue distribution partnerships that this ‘reality(ies) of control’…prevents today,” he said. the DOJ said in its filing Wednesday, citing Judge Amit Mehta’s ruling.

“The playing field is not level due to Google’s conduct, and Google’s standing reflects the ill-gotten gains of an illegally acquired advantage,” the DOJ said. “The remedy must fill this gap and deprive Google of these advantages.”

A copy of the DOJ filing is available at this link.

In response, Google said the government’s “stunning proposal would harm consumers and America’s global technology leadership.”

The DOJ “has chosen to promote a radical interventionist agenda that would harm Americans and their global technological leadership,” Kent Walker, president of global affairs and chief legal officer of Google and Alphabet, wrote in a blog post. The DOJ’s extremely broad proposal goes well beyond the Court’s decision. It would break a line of Google products — even beyond search — that people love and find useful in their daily lives.

Among other things, Walker claimed that the separation proposal “would require disclosure to unknown foreign and domestic companies not only of Google’s innovations and results, but, even more troubling, of Americans’ personal search queries.” . He also said it would “chill our investments in artificial intelligence, perhaps the most important innovation of our time, in which Google plays a leading role.”

In its proposed final ruling, the DOJ said that “the simplest solution – the first option – would be (to force Google to) divest Android, which would prevent Google from using Android to exclude competing search providers.” » But the government said it recognized that “such a transfer could give rise to significant objections from Google or other market participants”.

As an alternative to divesting Android, the DOJ – joined by a group of state attorneys general in this case – “presented behavioral solutions that would weaken Google’s ability to use its control over the Android ecosystem to further its general research services and its research. text advertising monopolies and limits Google’s ability to discriminate in favor of its own search and advertising activities. This option would require “vigilance and oversight” by the court and the government. If this path does not result in “significant relief in these critical markets,” the court could require Google to divest Android, the filing says.

Judge Mehta will rule on relief in this case following a two-week trial scheduled for April 2025.