Google will not have to sell its Chrome web browser but must share information with competitors, a U.S. federal judge has ordered.
The remedies decided by District Judge Amit Mehta have emerged after a years-long court battle over Google's dominance in online search.
The case centred around Google's position as the default search engine on a range of its own products such as Android and Chrome as well as others made by the likes of Apple.
The U.S. Department of Justice had demanded that Google sell Chrome - Tuesday's decision means the tech giant can keep it but it will be barred from having exclusive contracts and must share search data with rivals.
Google had proposed less drastic solutions, such as limiting its revenue-sharing agreements with firms like Apple to make its search engine the default on their devices and browsers.
On Tuesday, the company indicated that it viewed the ruling as a victory, stating that the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) likely contributed to the outcome.
Today's decision recognizes how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI, which is giving people so many more ways to find information, Google stated.
The company had denied wrongdoing since the charges were filed in 2020, arguing that its market dominance comes from superior product offerings.
Judge Mehta previously ruled that Google used unfair practices to establish a monopoly over online search. However, he deemed a full divestiture of Chrome a poor fit for this case. Google will also retain its Android operating system, which powers many smartphones.
Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater commented on the ruling, stating, Today's remedy order agreed with the need to restore competition to the long-monopolized search market.
Shares in Alphabet surged by more than 8% after the ruling, indicating market optimism. Smartphone manufacturers like Apple, Samsung, and Motorola are also expected to benefit, as they can now freely promote other search engines alongside Google's offerings.
Despite the ruling being seen as favorable for Google, competitors like DuckDuckGo argue that it does not do enough to combat Google's illegal behaviors.
This decision is not the conclusion of Google's legal challenges, as another trial is slated for later this month concerning the company's conduct in online advertising.
