"Chrome Must Be Sold" vs "We Must Compete with China": Second Round of Google Antitrust Trial Begins

US Court Ruled Against Google's Internet Monopoly Last August
Department of Justice Reiterates Need for Chrome Sale
Decision Expected in August... Google Claims "Necessary to Compete with China"

The second round of the trial aimed at resolving the illegal monopoly of Google, the world's largest search engine company, in the internet search market began on the 21st (local time). This trial follows the decision by a U.S. court in August last year, which ruled that Google's dominance in the internet search market constituted an "illegal monopoly." As a result of this trial, there is growing attention on whether Google's dominance?currently accounting for about 90% of the global search market?will be weakened and whether the search market will be reorganized.

At the first hearing held at the federal court in Washington, D.C., the U.S. Department of Justice, which filed the lawsuit, reiterated the need for the sale of the Chrome browser to resolve Google's illegal monopoly. The Department of Justice filed the lawsuit in October 2020, during the final months of President Trump's first term. At the time, this lawsuit was noted as the largest "technology monopoly lawsuit" since the Department of Justice's long-standing dispute with Microsoft (MS) in the 1990s.

The Department of Justice argued, "The best way to resolve Google's monopoly in the internet search market is to break up Google, including Chrome," and insisted, "The court should order Google to take measures to restore competition in this market." The Department further emphasized, "Chrome is a major gateway to search," and stated, "If Chrome is sold, competitors will gain access to a massive volume of search queries, enabling them to compete with Google."

The Department also raised concerns that Google could further expand its dominance in the search market by leveraging artificial intelligence (AI), stating, "Google is already showing signs of trying to strengthen its dominance, centering on its flagship AI product, Gemini." The Department added, "Remedial actions by the court must be forward-looking and should not overlook emerging threats," and pointed out, "Google is applying the same strategies to Gemini that it previously used in the search market."

Additionally, the Department of Justice proposed prohibiting Google from paying browser developers and smartphone manufacturers for priority placement of its search engine. It also mentioned the possibility of requiring Google to sell its Android smartphone operating system if competition is not restored, even after such measures.

In response, Google described the Department of Justice's request as "extreme" and argued that the court's remedy should be limited to restricting the terms of default search engine agreements. Regarding the Department's claim that Google is seeking to expand its dominance in the search market through AI, Google countered that this "falls outside the scope of the lawsuit" and asserted that "the remedies proposed by the Department of Justice would hinder American innovation."

In particular, Google invoked the global competition with China in the AI sector, claiming that a complete Google is necessary to compete with China and safeguard national security. Leanne Mulholland, Google's Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, pointed to China's DeepSeek as a rising AI competitor in a blog post on the same day, expressing concern that the Department of Justice's demands for the sale of Chrome and other breakups "would hinder American innovation at a critical moment." She emphasized, "We are engaged in fierce competition with China for next-generation technological leadership, and Google stands at the forefront of American companies driving scientific and technological innovation."

This trial will proceed over the next three weeks, and by August, the court is expected to decide on measures to resolve the illegal monopoly in the internet search market, focusing on the Department of Justice's proposals. Google plans to appeal as soon as the ruling is finalized.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) analyzed, "This lawsuit marks a milestone in the years-long efforts by U.S. antitrust authorities to regulate Silicon Valley's tech giants, and new restrictions that may benefit competitors such as Microsoft (MS), which operates the Bing search engine, could be applied to Google."

Meanwhile, Google has decided to discontinue support for country-specific domains in its website addresses and integrate them into 'google.com.' In a recent blog post, Google announced, "Going forward, traffic accessed via country code top-level domains (ccTLDs) will be automatically redirected to 'google.com'." As a result, country-specific domains such as 'google.co.kr,' which was the domain for Korea, will no longer appear in browser address bars.