What Happens to Chrome if the DOJ Breaks Up Google?

A significant legal battle is unfolding between Google and the Department of Justice (DOJ), potentially reshaping the tech giant's structure. As part of its antitrust case against Google, the DOJ has proposed remedies ranging from business practice changes to divesting major assets like Google Chrome. But what might happen if Chrome is sold off? Who could buy it, and would these measures truly foster a competitive landscape?

The DOJ's Push for Structural Remedies

In its ongoing antitrust case, the DOJ accuses Google of monopolizing general search services and search advertising. After Judge Amit Mehta ruled this summer that Google holds an illegal monopoly in these areas, the government has laid out a bold plan to restore competition. Among these proposals is the sale of Google Chrome, a remedy that experts say could shake up the tech world.

David Halliday, a professor of strategic management at George Washington School of Business, says that these remedies would threaten Google's dominance in its core business of search and search advertising. He compares the potential impact to other major antitrust cases, noting it could rival the breakups of Standard Oil or AT&T. Even partial acceptance of these remedies could shave billions off Google's empire. (Source: theverge.com)

Why the DOJ Wants Chrome Sold

Google Chrome, with its dominant 60% share of the U.S. browser market, acts as a gateway to Google's search engine. By default, it's installed on Android devices, giving Google an edge in steering users toward its search services. The DOJ argues that this control creates an unfair advantage, and selling Chrome could remove a critical gatekeeping role.

But how would selling Chrome affect the broader tech ecosystem? If Chrome were sold, questions arise about who might buy it and what conditions the court might impose on the new owner.

Potential Buyers for Chrome

Several companies could vie for Chrome, each with unique implications for the market:

Big Tech Players

While companies like Amazon and Meta might show interest, antitrust concerns could block their bids. Apple, which already operates the Safari browser, might be a more acceptable candidate if regulators see value in encouraging Apple to develop its search engine. However, such a move could lead to further market consolidation.

AI Companies

Large language model developers like OpenAI or Anthropic could see value in Chrome as a distribution channel for AI-powered tools and services. Chrome's audience offers a lucrative opportunity to monetize search-related products.

Private Equity Firms

If Chrome were sold to private equity or less experienced tech firms, the browser's development could suffer, affecting user experience and innovation.

Regardless of the buyer, Judge Mehta may impose restrictions to prevent Chrome from becoming another anti-competitive tool in a new owner's arsenal.

Risks and Rewards of a Chrome Sale

Selling Chrome doesn't necessarily guarantee a level playing field. DuckDuckGo's senior vice president of public affairs, Kamyl Bazbaz, emphasizes the need for thoughtful oversight, stating that the judge and DOJ must ensure a sale doesn't create another environment where smaller search engines struggle to compete.

Even if Chrome shifts ownership, Google's search engine may remain the most visited website. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Mandeep Singh says that the ads on Google are so effective because Chrome plays a big part in user engagement. Without Chrome, Google's ad revenue could take a hit, but its brand and existing user habits might keep it dominant in search.

Chromium's Role in the Ecosystem

Alongside Chrome, the DOJ proposes spinning off Chromium, the open-source project behind browsers like Microsoft Edge and Brave. While this move might preserve competition among browsers, it also introduces risks. Smaller browser developers rely on Chromium, and disruptions could impact their operations. Singh downplays these fears, suggesting Chromium could evolve independently, but the transition would still require careful oversight.

Beyond Chrome: Behavioral Remedies

Selling Chrome is just one part of the DOJ's broader effort to curb Google's alleged self-preferencing practices. These involve using its platforms to unfairly promote its own services. For instance, Google has historically made its search engine mandatory on Android devices or degraded the quality of rival products on its platforms.

The DOJ proposes strict rules to prevent Google from favoring its own search engine, ads, or AI products on platforms like Android. This could open doors for competitors, giving them greater flexibility and access to audiences traditionally dominated by Google.

Sharing the Crown Jewels: Google's Data

One of the most striking proposals is a mandate for Google to share its search data with competitors. The DOJ argues that Google's vast query data creates an insurmountable advantage, allowing it to refine search results and stifle competition.

By syndicating search data to rivals like Bing or DuckDuckGo, competitors could enhance their own search products. Singh predicts this could cut Google's search revenue by up to 10%, likening it to Meta's revenue losses after Apple's privacy changes. While Google would still profit from data licensing, its dominant position could weaken significantly.

Ending Exclusionary Deals

Another straightforward remedy involves banning Google from exclusive contracts that position its search engine as the default option on devices like Apple's iPhone. These deals have been a cornerstone of Google's market dominance, but their removal might not hurt Google as much as expected. Without the need to pay billions for such agreements, Google could save money, while users might still choose it due to ingrained habits.

Android Could Be Next

Notably absent from the DOJ's current proposals is a demand for Google to sell Android, its mobile operating system. However, the DOJ has kept this option on the table as a contingency if other remedies fail. Losing Android would strike a far deeper blow to Google's distribution power than selling Chrome, making it a last-resort measure.

What Happens Next?

As the trial continues, Google faces tough choices. Even if Judge Mehta adopts only some of the proposed remedies, Google's business model could see significant disruption. Yet, experts agree that as long as Google retains key assets like YouTube, Android, and its search engine, it will remain a tech powerhouse.

The case highlights a central question for regulators: how to balance breaking up monopolies with fostering true competition. The fate of Chrome, and Google's broader ecosystem, will offer critical lessons for the future of antitrust enforcement in the digital age.

What's Your Opinion?

How will your browsing experience change if Chrome is sold to a new owner? Would you still trust Chrome for its security and performance if it's no longer under Google, or would you consider switching to alternative browsers like Edge, Firefox, or Brave? If Chrome no longer defaults to Google Search or includes a search engine choice screen, would you explore other search engines like DuckDuckGo, Bing, or a new competitor, or stick with Google?