Last year, a federal judge ruled that Google had illegally maintained a search monopoly, but allowed the company to keep paying to be the default search engine on Apple devices (with very few caveats). Now, the Department of Justice and a group of states are appealing the overall decision. Here are the details.
A bit of background
In August 2024, Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google had resorted to illegal means to maintain its monopoly in the U.S. online search market.
Part of that decision involved Google’s exclusionary agreements with companies such as Apple, as they created steeper anticompetitive effects.
With that decision in the books, the case moved to a year-long remedies phase, during which multiple witnesses from all sides, including from associated companies such as Apple, tried to make their case as to what, exactly, should happen to Google.
From forcing the company to spin off Chrome to barring it from exclusive agreements like the one with Apple, everything seemed on the table.
It was during one such hearing that Apple SVP of Services Eddy Cue famously downplayed Apple’s deal with Google, suggesting that AI would make search (and even the iPhone) obsolete to the point of rendering their current exclusive deal irrelevant.
Finally, last September, Judge Mehta issued his opinion, which was overwhelmingly beneficial to Google.
Here’s what Google can and cannot do when it comes to partnerships with Apple going forward:
What is allowed
- Apple’s search partnership with Google may continue. Judge Mehta rejected a blanket “payment ban,” finding it would harm partners and consumers. For this reason, Google gets to keep paying Apple to be the default (albeit not exclusive) search engine on Safari;
- Google will still be allowed to pay browser developers (including Apple) for default status, provided the browser is allowed to promote other search engines, set different defaults by OS version or private mode, and change the default on an annual basis;
- And speaking of defaults, the court found that choice screens weren’t shown to improve search competition, so this means that Apple won’t have to add new choice UIs in Safari or iOS because of this ruling;
- When it comes to generative AI, the ruling bars contracts that would stop a Google partner from simultaneously distributing generative AI products (as well as other general search engines and browsers). In practice, this means that Apple will be free to promote or integrate non-Google assistants or chatbots even while Google Search remains the default on Safari.
What is not allowed
- No exclusivity, including for generative AI products or features. This means that Google can’t require Apple to make Google the only option, block Apple from featuring rivals, or tie the deal for one Google app (like Search) to another (like Gemini);
- No exclusivity-adjacent incentives. Google can’t offer higher revenue-share tiers or bonuses in exchange for exclusivity or for bundling multiple Google apps together;
- 12-month default limit. Google can’t condition revenue share on keeping any Google service as the default for more than one year. This means that Google’s competitors will get a yearly shot at offering Apple a better deal.
Last December, the court handed down its final judgment, which Google appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals last month.
Google also asked the federal court to put parts of the ruling on hold while the appeals court reviews the case, which brings us to today.
DOJ and multiple states file an appeal
As revealed in court documents today, the Department of Justice and a group of states are also formally appealing the decision to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
From the document:
NOTICE OF CROSS-APPEAL
Notice is hereby given that the United States of America, the State of Arkansas, the State of California, the State of Florida, the State of Georgia, the State of Indiana, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, the State of Louisiana, the State of Michigan, the State of Missouri, the State of Montana, the State of South Carolina, the State of Texas, and the State of Wisconsin, plaintiffs in the above-named case, hereby cross-appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from the final judgment of this Court entered on December 5, 2025, and all orders in this action merged into that final judgment.
It’s not yet clear which specific parts of the ruling the DOJ and states will challenge on appeal, but they’re likely to try to overturn as much of Judge Mehta’s decision as possible, which could include parts of Google’s deal with Apple that were left intact.
Google hasn’t yet commented on the cross-appeal, and it’s likely that Apple will also remain silent on the case until, or if, the terms of its deal come back into play.
Be that as it may, it’s unlikely that the situation will change any time soon, with the appeals court not expected to weigh in until later this year, or beyond.
Accessory deals on Amazon
- AirPods Pro 3
- Beats USB-C to USB-C Woven Short Cable
- Wireless CarPlay adapter
- Logitech MX Master 4
- Apple AirTag 4 Pack
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Comments