Ask any bow hunter about their dream shot at their dream buck, and if they are so inclined, they'll tell you about the long stalk through a tag alder swamp, keeping a wary eye on the direction of the wind. But it always boils down to that one thing: the ultimate goal of the buck hunters.
For years, Washington antitrust lawyers have been stalking their dream buck, except in their case, that wall-hanger is Google. The dream of humbling Google, much like the government did to Microsoft in the 1990s, and prying either Chrome or Android out of Google's grip, would feel like a once-in-a-generation chance to reshape the internet.
Judge Amit Mehta ruled today that Google abused its dominance by locking up browser search defaults and using contracts to bury its rivals.
The hammer that many expected never fell.
Google still hosts Chrome under its roof, and Android is untouched. When the ruling fell, Wall Street breathed a big sigh of relief; investors realized the company would live to see another day without a forced corporate breakup, while Google's stock surged.
Judge Mehta's ruling was an unusual split: Google's monopoly power was exposed and condemned; however, the punishment was carefully limited.
The government's shot flew across the bow, but not through the hull.
The Department of Justice sought what amounted to a corporate amputation, separating Chrome or Android from Google's core empire. Stopping just short of that, Judge Mehta imposed restrictions designed to chip away at Google's tight control over search.
First, Google isn't allowed to demand exclusive contracts that guarantee its search engine appears as the default option in internet browsers. This exclusivity ensured that competitors, like DuckDuckGo, were kneecapped before they even had a moment to breathe.
Second, Google must include its rivals when collecting the search index data—the internet's "library." Gaining access to even portions of it means that competitors' search results might finally be usable at scale.
The six years the judge placed on oversight was a compromise: the DOJ asked for ten years, Google three—Judge Mehta split the difference. Six years may not seem very long; in tech time, however, it provides plenty of time for the industry trajectory to change.
Put plainly: The court let the giant keep his sword, but took away his shield.
The dramatic remedies that the DOJ hoped would change Google overnight didn't materialize; there wasn't a court-ordered breakup of Chrome, an Android spin-off, and the company's tightly connected services remain intact.
In what might be a wise move, there will not be a "choice screen" suddenly appearing on your screen to select from a list of search engines. It's too soon to determine if Judge Mehta's foresight will be rewarded; he concluded that thanks to the rise of generative AI competitors, such as OpenAI, Perplexity, and Anthropic, the market is already shifting. The judge argued that user choice is broadening naturally, and no government-mandated prompt is needed.
Although that finding could be frustrating to antitrust hawks, it reflects a truth that even monopolies stumble when new tech disrupts the field.
In the byte-delete-byte internet world, Google dethroned both Yahoo and AltaVista. With the advent of AI-driven search tools, Google's throne might eventually crumble without requiring a court order.
Every day, Chrome users will continue on their respective journeys; tomorrow won't feel different, their browsers will open, and their search engine still defaults to Google. The company's brand, speed, and familiarity remain intact. If you weren't following the case, you might not even know anything happened.
The old joke about the swimming duck applies here: The duck (Google) still casually floats on the water, but underwater, it's an entirely different story. Things have shifted underwater; competitors now have access to the kind of raw data they need to build credible tools. Google won't be toppled overnight, but now they have a fighting chance.
This reason is why the ruling is so important: Real competition drives better products, better privacy protections, and yes, even better search results.
My analogies are all over the place today, sorry. But allow for another: It's like playing in a game of baseball where one team owns all the equipment, bats, balls, helmets, and gloves, but now, the other team finally gets to use some of their equipment. The final score may still be lopsided, but the game is no longer a farce.
The Department of Justice wanted a chainsaw, but the court handed them a scalpel to make deep enough cuts that Google feels the sting. Chrome and Android stay, and your everyday browsing feels the same, but the monopoly has finally been punctured.
Judge Mehta's judgment isn't the takedown some hoped for, but it's a start. For once, the internet's most powerful gatekeeper needs to keep the gate open. It's in that small crack where the seeds of competition may finally take root.
Google may keep its empire, but stories like this one prove just how much power is concentrated in one place. That’s why PJ Media exists: To cut through the spin and give you the truth. If you want more in-depth reporting and commentary you can’t find in the legacy press, join us as a VIP.
Become part of the fight for honest journalism today: Subscribe here.