After the government pushed Google’s disintegration, accusing it of commercial practices that violate the anti -monopoly laws, the Mountain View, California, proposed its own solutions on Friday – to restructure its business contracts instead.
Google said in a file of the court: “Organizing a fast -changing industry, such as researching with a Ghazi decree, such as the interface proposed by the prosecutors, will harm competition, innovation and consumers.”
The request comes after a federal judge found in August that the technology company had illegally kept the research monopoly. Google said it does not agree to the decision and plans to appeal.
Amit B. Mihata, a judge at the US Provincial Court of Colombia, is now trying to make a decision on ways to restore competition. Last month, the US Department of Justice and several states suggested solutions to reform what it described as the monopoly of illegal research from Google, which included forcing the company to sell Chrome.
The proposed reforms of Google are more narrow than the Ministry of Justice proposed. What the judge decides can reshape the future of the Internet and affect Google’s ads.
In the court file, Google suggested setting restrictions on their contracts with manufacturers of mobile devices and wireless transport companies. For example, Google suggested that it will not enter an agreement with Apple where the virtual search engine is not allowed to appoint a different virtual search annually in the United States and promote other search services.
“” Blog post.
The 300 -page teacher is focused by Mihata on how Google comments on its hegemony by pushing major companies such as Apple and Samsung, so it is the default search engine on web browsers and mobile devices. The judge found that these agreements hindered Google’s competitors of growth and reducing the incentive for other companies to invest in research.
The judge wrote: “The truth is that no new participant can hope to compete with Google to virtual contact for Firefox or any other browser.” “Google query, quality feature and high -revenue stock payments are strong incentives just to stay in their position.”
Google’s virtual positions on Firefox of Mozilla constitute 80 % of Mozilla operating revenues. But Google also pays Apple more than all other partners combined. In 2022, Google Apple paid an estimated $ 20 billion, so the virtual search engine can be on the Safari browser.
Mozilla this week raised concerns that some of the proposed solutions from the Ministry of Justice can harm web browsers. One of the potential repairs includes the prevention of Google from entering the revenue sharing agreements associated with the distribution of its search services.
“By enhancing revenue flows for important browsers’ competitors, these treatments are inadvertently exposed the positions of a handful of powerful players.” Blog post. Mozilla said that Google was the Firefox virtual search engine in the United States because it “provides the best search experience for our users.”
Outside partnerships with major technology companies, there are other ways that Google keeps controlling the method of access to search engines. Google also operates the famous Chrome Web browser and Android mobile operating system.
Last month, the Ministry of Justice and several states urged the judge to force Google to sell Chrome. The agency also suggested that the technology company claim a “selection screen” to each Google browser when the user does not choose a virtual search engine until people know that there are other options available.
Other ideas offered by the government include allowing publishers to cancel the participation of Google in using their content to train artificial intelligence tools and give advertisers more control of ads that appear in the search results.
Google responded against the proposed solutions to the government, describing the approach as “bypassing the unprecedented government.”
Mihata is expected to decide the solutions by August 2025.