What will Google’s end-user cookie opt-out look like in Chrome?
Well, who cares because Google might not own Chrome for much longer.
According to a new report by Bloomberg, antitrust officials at the DOJ plan to recommend on Wednesday that federal judge Amit Mehta order Google to sell its Chrome browser. The DOJ also plans to ask Google to implement data licensing requirements.
Mehta would have to approve the proposal, and it’s unclear if that will happen, as Google is likely to fight the recommendation aggressively.
The move isn’t entirely unexpected. In October, when the DOJ filed proposed remedies to address Google’s alleged monopoly in the internet search market, one option was to limit Google’s control over distribution through structural remedies, such as separating Chrome, Play, and Android. Google’s response was that such a move would “break” products like Chrome, increase costs, and disrupt the broader ecosystem. The company also argued that Chrome’s security features could be undermined if it were split off.
Google broke antitrust laws with its search and ad practices, Mehta ruled in August after a roughly two-month-plus trial. Google, unsurprisingly, plans to appeal.
Why This Matters:
The DOJ’s proposal could forever reshape the search landscape, potentially dismantling the leadership position of Chrome and its owner, Google. Chrome serves as a key entry point for Google’s search business and many aspects of its adtech operations.
In October, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, warned against the proposal, stating: “Government overreach in a fast-moving industry may have negative unintended consequences for American innovation and consumers.” She described the suggested remedies, including breaking out Chrome, as “radical.”
This is just the DOJ’s initial ask, and Google clearly plans to fight back every step of the way.
Experts React:
Adam Kovacevich, Founder and CEO of the Chamber of Progress, a trade group that represents technology companies, including Google, on issues like antitrust law, weighed in on the report, calling it Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter’s “last stand.”
In a tweet, Kovacevich argues that, with a new administration on the horizon, Kanter has “nothing to lose” and has proposed “fantastical remedies that the judge will surely deem too broad.” Fighting words!
Our Take:
In the words of outgoing President Joe Biden, “This is a big f*cking deal.” But a key question remains: how will consumers react to the idea of splitting off Chrome?
People don’t like change, and they value simplicity. As an experiment, ask someone if they like companies like Google or Amazon—they’ll probably say no. Then ask how they’d feel if the government mandated that Google sell its Chrome browser to an undisclosed third party or required Amazon to split its grocery delivery service from its main app. When faced with the prospect of managing more services and seeing fundamental changes to how they use these platforms, consumers are likely to not only reject the idea but vehemently oppose it.
The wild card, however, is the Trump administration. The search antitrust case originated during Trump’s first term. How they’ll handle it moving forward remains to be seen. (Will the election craziness play a role?) While there’s a sense that Trump and his administration will continue to criticize Big Tech, especially around content moderation, this seems to go well beyond that.
Trump’s team will have to consider — do we dig in on this or give our base what they want on the content moderation side, which is a clearer win politically. Also, what will Elon Musk say about this given his pushback on regulations, at large, and his obvious tech sway with the new admin?
