Google could use AI to extend search monopoly, DOJ says as trial begins
Google Faces Landmark Antitrust Trial: DOJ Warns AI May Cement Search Monopoly
In what could redefine the future of the internet, Alphabet Inc.’s Google has stepped into a Washington courtroom to face a landmark antitrust trial brought by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). The case marks the most significant legal challenge Google has faced in its 25-year history and may determine whether the tech giant’s dominance in online search will continue unchallenged—especially as it moves deeper into artificial intelligence (AI).
The trial began Monday, and early arguments from the DOJ suggest the government seeks more than just an end to Google’s long-standing business arrangements. They also want to prevent the company from using AI to further entrench its monopoly.
What Is the DOJ Alleging?
The DOJ argues that Google maintains its position as the default search engine on billions of devices through exclusive agreements with companies like Apple, Mozilla, and Samsung. These deals ensure that users encounter Google Search first—often without realizing they have a choice.
Rather than letting quality or user preference dictate market share, the DOJ claims Google has paid billions of dollars to shut out competition, thereby violating antitrust laws. These deals, the government says, have deprived users of meaningful alternatives and allowed Google to dominate over 90% of the online search market.
Why AI Has Entered the Picture
While the trial’s core focus remains on Google’s current dominance, the DOJ has raised red flags about the company’s push into AI-driven search. The government believes Google may use its position to dominate the next generation of internet tools, such as AI chatbots, voice-based search, and AI-generated content summaries.
DOJ attorney Kenneth Dintzer urged the court to consider “forward-looking remedies” to limit Google’s ability to use AI for reinforcing its monopoly. He warned that Google’s rapid AI deployment—through tools like Bard and its Search Generative Experience (SGE)—could leave competitors with no chance to catch up.
“If we don’t act now,” Dintzer said, “AI could make Google’s dominance permanent.”
Google’s Response: We Win Because We’re Better
Google’s legal team pushed back strongly. They insisted that users choose Google because it delivers faster, more accurate results—not because they’re forced to. They highlighted that anyone can change their default search engine in a few steps and that alternatives like Bing, Yahoo, and DuckDuckGo remain readily available.
“People use Google because they want to, not because they have to,” said the company’s lead attorney during opening arguments.
The company also emphasized that the online search market is evolving rapidly, with new challengers emerging from the world of AI, such as ChatGPT, Perplexity, and other AI-powered tools.
Why This Trial Matters
The case carries enormous significance. For the first time since the Microsoft antitrust case of the 1990s, the U.S. government is directly challenging a tech giant’s business model with the potential to break apart or restructure parts of the company.
Legal scholars believe this trial will establish new precedents for how courts view tech monopolies in the AI era. If the court agrees with the DOJ, it may issue remedies that:
- Restrict Google’s default search engine agreements
- Limit the integration of AI within search results
- Require Google to open access to search markets for competitors
Industry Reactions
The case has divided opinions in the tech world. Some see the trial as necessary to preserve competition and prevent future abuses. Others worry that excessive regulation could slow down innovation and penalize a company for its success.
Smaller search companies like DuckDuckGo and Ecosia support the DOJ’s position. They argue that Google’s pre-installed dominance makes it almost impossible for users to even discover alternatives.
Meanwhile, AI developers and independent platforms are closely watching the case, concerned that Google’s massive resources and existing dominance might allow it to monopolize AI-powered content delivery as well.
What Happens Next?
The trial is expected to run over several weeks and feature testimony from Google executives, industry experts, economists, and even former competitors. The court will also review internal Google emails and contracts, which could provide insight into the company’s intentions and business strategy.
If the court rules in favor of the DOJ, the implications could be huge. Google might have to alter or dissolve contracts, introduce clearer user choice options, or even separate its AI operations from its core search engine.
Will This Change How We Use the Internet?
Possibly. The trial could redefine how people interact with search engines. If the court restricts how AI-generated content appears in search, users may see more diverse results and fewer pre-answered queries. This could affect how content creators, advertisers, and even news websites reach their audiences.
Moreover, success for the DOJ could open the door for competitors to innovate and offer new search experiences, improving user choice and potentially reducing Google’s influence over what people see online.
Conclusion: The Stakes Are High
The Google antitrust trial may appear to center on browser defaults and market shares, but at its core, it’s about who controls access to information in the digital age. As AI begins to change how we search, read, and make decisions, regulators want to ensure that no single company holds the keys to the future of knowledge.
Whether Google wins or loses, the case will shape tech policy, competition, and user experience for years to come. For now, all eyes are on the courtroom—and what it means for the future of search.
