Google dodges forced selloff of Chrome browser in landmark antitrust case — sparking furor at slap on wrist

Core Viewpoint - Google has avoided a forced breakup of its online search monopoly after a federal judge rejected the harshest remedies proposed by the Justice Department, which has drawn criticism for being insufficient in addressing antitrust concerns [1][8]. Legal Ruling - US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled against the forced divestiture of Google's key assets, such as the Chrome web browser and Android operating system, stating that these were not used to impose illegal restraints [2][13]. - Instead of severe penalties, Mehta ordered Google to share its search data with rivals to enhance competition [4]. Restrictions on Google - Google is prohibited from entering into exclusive deals for internet search but can still make payments to partners like Apple and AT&T to maintain its default search engine status on smartphones [5][12]. - The judge noted that cutting off payments could lead to significant harm to distribution partners and consumers, advising against a broad payment ban [5]. Market Reaction - Following the ruling, Google's stock surged over 6% in after-hours trading, while Apple’s stock rose nearly 4%, indicating a positive market reaction to the decision [8]. Criticism of the Ruling - Prominent antitrust advocates criticized the ruling, describing it as a failure to adequately address Google's monopolistic practices, with calls for the Justice Department to appeal the decision [9][10][11]. - The ruling is seen as a continuation of Google's monopoly rather than a corrective measure, with critics arguing that it undermines the legal findings of monopolization [10][11]. Context of the Case - This ruling concludes a five-year legal battle considered one of the most significant antitrust cases in decades, with potential implications for the future of the internet and Google's business model [13].