At the same time, Google seeks to distinguish itself from arrivals from AI. “AI generating societies are not trying to overtake Google,” said Schmidtlein. Google’s team maintains that its actions have harmed any AI product like Chatgpt or perplexity, and in any case, they are not on the research market as defined by the court.
Mehta has thought about the future of research, suggesting that we may have to rethink what a general search engine is in 2025. “Maybe people no longer want 10 blue links,” he said.
The problem of chrome and an elegant solution
Sometimes, during the case, Mehta expressed skepticism as to the divestment of chrome. During the closing arguments, Dahlquist reiterated the close relationship between research and navigators, reminding court that 35% of Google’s search volume comes from Chrome.
Mehta now seems more receptive to a chrome division than before, perhaps in part because the effects of other remedies become so troubled. He described the disinvestment of “less speculative” and “more elegant” chrome disinvestment than data and placement remedies. Google said again, as it did throughout the remedy phase, that forcing it to abandon Chrome is not taken care of in the law and that the domination of chrome is the result of innovation.
Even if Mehta leans towards the control of this remedy, chrome can be a bonding point. The judge does not seem to be convinced that supposed buyers – a group which apparently includes almost all large technological companies – have the scale and expertise necessary to maintain chrome. This open source project is the basics of many other browsers, which makes it smoothly continuously operating on the web.
If Google abandons Chrome, Chromium goes with it, but what about people who keep it? The DoJ maintains that it is common for employees to accompany an acquisition, but it is far from certain. There was a discussion that a buyer can commit to hiring staff to keep the chrome. The DoJ suggests that Google could be ordered to provide financial incentives to ensure that critical roles are fulfilled, but it seems potentially disorderly.
A chrome sale seems more likely than earlier, but nothing has yet been assured. After the last arguments on each side, it is up to Mehta to think about the facts before deciding on Google’s fate. This should happen in August, but nothing will change immediately for Google. The company has already confirmed that it would appeal the case, hoping that the initial decision will be overthrown. He could still be years before this case reached his ultimate conclusion.
