In a Google antitrust ruling on 5 August 2024, the US District Court for the District of Columbia held that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by maintaining its monopoly in general search services and general search text advertising through exclusive distribution agreements. Judge Amit P. Mehta set out the conclusions in a 286-page memorandum opinion.
Corporate INTL Newsroom · Competition & Antitrust
Google Antitrust Ruling: US Court Finds Google Unlawfully Maintained Its Search Monopoly
By The Corporate INTL Newsroom · 7 August 2024
The decision resolves the liability phase of two consolidated cases. The US Department of Justice, joined by 11 states, filed United States v Google on 20 October 2020, and 38 states brought a parallel case led by Colorado on 17 December 2020. The court held a nine-week bench trial starting in September 2023 and heard closing arguments in early May 2024.
What the court found
The court held that there are relevant product markets for general search services and general search text ads, that Google has monopoly power in those markets, and that its distribution agreements are exclusive and have anticompetitive effects without valid procompetitive justifications. It also found that Google had charged supracompetitive prices for general search text ads.
The opinion records that Google's share of US search queries was nearly 90% by 2020, and almost 95% on mobile devices. It found that Google paid its distribution partners more than $26 billion in 2021 in revenue share for default placements on browsers, mobile devices and carriers, with partners agreeing not to preload other general search engines.
Where Google prevailed
Other findings favoured Google. The court held that Google lacks monopoly power in a broader search advertising market, that there is no product market for general search advertising, and that Google is not liable for conduct involving its SA360 advertising platform. The court also declined to impose sanctions for the failure to preserve employee chat messages, while warning that companies relying on employees to preserve evidence do so at their own risk.
What happens next
The Google antitrust ruling addresses liability only. The court has not yet decided what remedies should follow, which will be the subject of further proceedings. Device makers, browser developers and advertisers will watch closely, because the distribution agreements at the centre of the case underpin significant revenue share payments across the industry.
Sources
Looking for legal or business advice?
Tell us what you need and the Corporate INTL team will help you find the right lawyer or adviser from our members in 150+ jurisdictions.
1What you need2Your details
More from the newsroom
All latest news → 
