By Jody Godoy

(Reuters) – Alphabet’s Google must sell its Chrome browser, share its data and search results with rivals and take other steps – including possibly selling Android – to end its search monopoly. line, prosecutors told a judge Wednesday.

The measures outlined by the Justice Department are part of a landmark case in Washington that has the potential to reshape how users find information.

They would be in place for a decade, enforced through a court-appointed panel to address what the judge in the case considered an illegal monopoly in search and related advertising in the United States, where Google handles 90% of searches.

“Google’s illegal conduct deprived its competitors not only of essential distribution channels, but also of distribution partners that might otherwise allow competitors to enter these markets in new and innovative ways,” the DOJ and state antitrust authorities in a court filing.

Their proposals include ending exclusive deals in which Google pays billions of dollars each year to Apple and other device vendors to make its search engine the default on their tablets and smartphones.

Google called the proposals surprising in a statement released Thursday.

“The DOJ’s approach would result in unprecedented government interference that would harm American consumers, developers, and small businesses – and jeopardize America’s global economic and technological leadership at precisely the time it is needed most,” said Kent Walker, Alphabet’s chief legal officer.

Google shares were trading down about 6% on Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta has scheduled a trial on the proposals for April, although President-elect Donald Trump and the DOJ’s next antitrust chief could intervene and change course in the case.

TECHNICAL COMMITTEE

The proposals are broad, including banning Google from re-entering the browser market for five years and insisting Google sell its Android mobile operating system if other solutions fail to restore competition. The DOJ also requested that Google be prohibited from purchasing or investing in competitors’ search, query-based artificial intelligence products or advertising technologies.

Publishers and websites would also have the option to opt out of participating in training on Google’s AI products.

A technical committee of five people appointed by the judge would ensure compliance with the prosecutors’ proposals. The committee, funded by Google, would have the power to demand documents, interview employees and review software code, according to the filing.

All of these measures aim to break “a perpetual feedback loop that further empowers Google” through additional users, data and advertising dollars, prosecutors said.

CHROME AND ANDROID

Chrome is the world’s most widely used web browser and is a pillar of Google’s business, providing information to users that helps the company target ads more effectively and cost-effectively.

Google used Chrome and Android to favor its own search engine over its competitors, prosecutors said.

Google said that giving away Chrome and Android, which are based on open source code and are free, would hurt companies that have exploited them to develop their own products.

The proposals would prevent Google from requiring devices running Android to include its search or AI products.

Google would have the option of selling the software instead of complying. The DOJ and state antitrust authorities would have to approve any potential buyer.

Google will have the opportunity to present its own proposals in December.

DATA SHARING

Google would be required under the proposals to license search results to its competitors at a nominal cost and share the data it collects from users with its competitors for free. It would be prohibited from collecting user data that it cannot share for privacy reasons.

Prosecutors developed the proposals after talking with Google rivals, including search engine DuckDuckGo.

“We think this is a really big deal and will lower barriers to competition,” said Kamyl Bazbaz, DuckDuckGo’s public affairs manager.

DuckDuckGo accused Google of trying to circumvent European Union rules requiring data sharing. Google said it would not compromise user trust by providing sensitive data to competitors.

(Reporting by Jody Godoy; Additional reporting by Chris Sanders; Editing by Rod Nickel and Christopher Cushing)