Explained: How Google kept Chrome after its biggest antitrust showdown

The US court spared Chrome in Google's monopoly case, tightening rules on deals and data but stopping short of breaking up its massive ad business

Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?

Google has finally caught a breather in one of the biggest antitrust battles in US history — thanks, ironically, to OpenAI and the rise of AI-driven searches.

 

On September 2, Judge Amit Mehta rejected a request from the Department of Justice (DoJ) and several US states to strip Google of Chrome, its dominant web browser. Instead, the court allowed Chrome to remain under Google’s control while placing new restrictions to curb anti-competitive behaviour.

 

While Google retains Chrome, the ruling limits how the tech giant can structure deals and control data. The court barred Google from signing exclusive contracts that give its search engine preferential treatment on Chrome, Google Assistant or the Gemini app.

 

It also ordered Google to share parts of its search index and query data with competitors on fair terms, enabling rivals to build their own search products with better access to data.

 

Importantly, the judge stopped short of forcing Google to divest Chrome or banning it from paying partners altogether. Google can still strike deals — such as the one with Apple that keeps it the default search engine on Safari — as long as they are not exclusive in a way that blocks rivals.

 

What was the Google antitrust case about and where did Chrome fit in?

 

Google has spent years in court defending how it maintains dominance in online search. The DoJ, joined by multiple states, filed suit in 2020, accusing Google of illegally monopolising the search and search advertising markets to shut out rivals.

 

Central to the case were the company’s massive payments to make Google Search the default on browsers, smartphones and devices.

 

The government argued these deals hindered competition from rivals like Bing and DuckDuckGo. One of the proposed remedies was a structural breakup—specifically, forcing Google to sell off Chrome.

 

Why was Chrome at risk?

 

Chrome is not just another browser—it is a powerful gateway to Google Search. On desktop computers, Chrome holds a dominant market share, and on Android smartphones, it comes pre-installed on billions of devices.

 

The Justice Department argued that this gave Google an unfair advantage and locked users into its ecosystem. Losing Chrome would have stripped Google of one of its most powerful distribution channels.

 

By rejecting divestiture, the court effectively saved Chrome for Google—while still imposing behavioural checks.

 

How did ChatGPT change the Google case?

 

When OpenAI launched ChatGPT in November 2022, it shook Silicon Valley—and Google—in unexpected ways. Initially seen as a threat, the chatbot became a surprising advantage in court.

 

Judge Mehta noted that tools like ChatGPT, Perplexity and Claude were transforming how users search for information, introducing real competition to the traditional search model.

 

That shift undercut the government’s argument that Google had an unbreakable grip on search. While AI hasn’t yet replaced Google Search, its growing adoption signalled to the court that the market was evolving—and that Google wasn’t beyond challenge.

 

What is antitrust law, and how does it apply here?

 

Antitrust law — also known as competition law — is designed to prevent companies from using dominance to stifle competitors. In traditional markets, the focus is often on consumer harm through higher prices. But in digital markets, where services like search are free, the emphasis shifts to barriers to competition.

 

Remedies can range from fines and rule changes to — in rare cases — company breakups. In Google’s case, the court opted for conduct-based remedies over structural ones.

 

Why is Chrome so critical to Google’s business?

 

Chrome is a major funnel to Google Search, especially on desktops and Android. Keeping it in-house allows Google to steer traffic and support its ad-funded business model.

 

According to Alphabet’s Form 10-K, more than 75 per cent of its 2024 revenue came from online advertising. Search and other ad revenues alone generated $198.1 billion.

 

StatCounter data for August 2025 shows Chrome holds roughly 70 per cent of the global desktop browser market. On mobile, “Chrome for Android” is the most used browser version worldwide. Despite regional variation, Chrome remains the dominant browser globally.

 

What limits does Chrome face outside the US?

 

Chrome is also under scrutiny abroad. In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is monitoring Google’s “Privacy Sandbox”, which replaces third-party cookies with new ad tech. The CMA has delayed or modified parts of the rollout to ensure competition.

 

In the EU, the new Digital Markets Act (DMA) requires Google to present users with “choice screens” when setting up Chrome or Android—letting them pick other browsers and search engines.

 

What’s next for Google and Chrome?

 

In the US, Google must now comply with the ruling:

 

• No exclusive distribution deals on Chrome, Search, Assistant or Gemini
• Fair data sharing with rivals
• Ongoing legal appeals on monopoly charges

 

While it has avoided the most drastic outcome — losing Chrome — Google now operates under tighter rules in a more competitive landscape. The AI shift may have helped save Chrome, but it also signals that Google’s search dominance is no longer unchallenged.