At the same time, Google tries to distinguish itself from AI Upstarts. “Generative AI companies do not try to go Google Out-Google,” says Schmidtlein. The Google team argues that its actions have not damaged AI products such as chatgpt or perplexity, and in any case they are not on the search market as defined by the court.
Mehta muses about the future of searching, which suggests that we might have to reconsider what a general search engine is in 2025. “Maybe people don't want 10 blue left,” he said.
The chrow problem and an elegant solution
Sometimes during the case Mehta has spoken Scepsis about the rejection of Chrome. While closing arguments, Dahlquist repeated the close relationship between searches and browsers, which reminded the court that 35 percent of Google's search volume comes from Chrome.
Mehta now seems more receptive to a chrome distribution than before, perhaps partly because the effects of the other remedies become so cloudy. He called the Chrome – less speculative “and” more elegant “than the data and placement remedies. Google claimed again, as it has during the remedy phase, that it is forcing to specify that Chrome specifies, is not supported in the law and that Chrome's dominance is the result of innovation.
Even if Mehta tends to order this remedy, Chrome can be a bottleneck. The judge does not seem convinced that the assumed buyers – a group that apparently includes almost every large technology company – have the scale and expertise that are needed to retain chromium. This open source project forms the basis of many other browsers, making the constant smooth operation of crucial importance for the web.
If Google gives up Chrome, Chromium will be added, but what about the people who maintain it? The DOJ claims that it is common for employees to go with a takeover, but that is far from certain. There was a discussion about insuring a buyer who could commit himself to hiring staff to maintain chrome. The DOJ suggests that Google could be ordered to offer financial incentives to ensure that critical roles are fulfilled, but that sounds potentially messy.
A chrome sale now seems more likely than before, but nothing is insured yet. After the latest arguments on each side, it is up to Mehta to transfer the facts before determining the fate of Google. That is expected to happen in August, but nothing will change for Google immediately. The company has already confirmed that it is appealing against the case, in the hope that the original ruling will be annulled. It can take years before this case comes to its ultimate conclusion.
