Google Search Trial Proves DOJ’s Remedies Risk U.S. Tech Leadership

The remedies phase of the Google Search trial is nearing its end, and it is clearer than ever that the remedies proposed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) fail to accomplish the government's stated objectives to foster competition and innovation. In fact, the arguments at trial have shown that the proposed remedies will do the exact opposite.

Throughout the trial, the DOJ argued for a proposal that would force Google to spin off its Chrome browser and share its data with competitors, ostensibly in the name of protecting competition. However, the reality is that these far-reaching proposals would benefit Google's large competitors and stifle innovation. Oddly, the DOJ has argued that Google Search does not compete with artificial intelligence (AI) large language models, while simultaneously saying that the proposed remedies are needed to encourage innovation in AI. But the AI marketplace is already fiercely competitive, with OpenAI, for example, having testified that "it has what it needs" to compete. If adopted by the court, the DOJ's remedy proposals, in other words, would only serve to further entrench the dominance of other big companies that already have a larger share of the AI market than Google.

Additionally, the DOJ's remedy proposals send a concerning message to startups, small businesses, and the United States' future innovators who dream of developing the next great American technologies. And that message is that if you become too successful, the federal government will launch investigations and legal action against you and attempt to undermine your success. But this is contrary to long-established antitrust precedent and will inevitably chill future innovation in the United States.

Another concern is that if Google is forced to share sensitive user information with competitors, including foreign companies, this data will be exposed to increased privacy and security risks. Millions of consumers use Google Search because of its superior functionality and because they trust the company's ability to keep their data secure. The DOJ's proposed remedies would fundamentally undermine that trust, and could destabilize the marketplace at a time when international competition on AI is more fierce than ever.

The future of technological innovation should be built right here in America. However, the DOJ has asked the court to put American innovation, U.S. consumers, and competition in jeopardy. In order to protect consumers and maintain U.S. leadership in tech innovation and AI development, the court should reject the DOJ's extreme and harmful remedies and allow American innovators to continue to grow and thrive.