- Google has appealed the US ruling that labeled its search business an illegal monopoly.
- The company says users pick Google because they want to, not because they are forced.
- Google wants the court to pause the order requiring it to share key search data with rivals.
- The judge rejected calls for Google to sell Chrome, but still imposed major remedies to boost competition.
Google has formally moved to challenge a major US court decision that found the company holds an illegal monopoly in online search and search advertising. Court records show the company filed a notice of appeal on Friday, signaling its intent to fight the ruling at a higher level and potentially reshape how regulators view dominance in the modern internet economy.
The case stems from a landmark decision delivered in 2024, when a US district judge concluded that Google’s position in search and text advertising was strengthened through exclusive distribution agreements.
These arrangements often made Google the default search engine across devices and browsers, a setup the court believed gave Google an unfair advantage by steering users toward its services before competitors had a real chance to compete.
Now Google is pushing back hard, arguing that the ruling misreads the market and ignores why people choose Google in the first place.
Google says users choose it freely, not by force
In its response, Google’s core message is simple. It claims people use Google because they prefer it, not because they are pressured into it.
Lee Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, addressed the decision publicly, saying the court overlooked a crucial reality of the search business: user choice is only a click away.
In Google’s view, the company’s success is tied to the quality of its product and the trust it has built over years of refining search results, improving speed, and integrating services that users find useful.
Google also pointed to the pace of change in the technology industry, arguing that the search landscape is not static. Competition comes not only from familiar rivals but also from fast moving start ups with serious funding and new ideas. The company believes the ruling fails to account for how quickly consumer habits shift when better tools appear.
This is not just a legal argument. It is also a strategic one. Google wants to frame the case as a question of consumer preference and innovation, rather than one of market control.
The data sharing order is the immediate flashpoint
Alongside its appeal, Google has asked District Court Judge Amit Mehta to pause a key part of the court’s remedy package while the appeal plays out.
That specific order would require Google to share certain data with competitors, including search index information and user interaction signals. The intent is to help rival search engines improve their products and reduce the gap created by Google’s scale and long running dominance.
Google argues that handing over this kind of data before the appeal is resolved could cause permanent harm. In its court filing, the company warned it could be forced to expose sensitive information that it considers trade secrets. Once shared, Google suggests, that data cannot be meaningfully recovered, even if the company later wins its appeal.
This is the heart of the company’s urgency. Appeals can take time, and Google does not want to hand over valuable internal assets while it is still challenging the legal foundation of the ruling itself.
Chrome sale rejected, but the pressure remains
The broader remedy conversation has already included some dramatic possibilities. Judge Mehta previously rejected a request from the US government that Google be forced to sell its Chrome browser. That outcome was a win for Google, at least on that front.
However, the judge still imposed other requirements aimed at reducing Google’s grip on the search ecosystem. By ordering data access for “qualified competitors,” the court signaled it wants real structural change, not just minor tweaks.
Google has been careful to say it is not trying to delay everything. The company noted it is not seeking to postpone other obligations tied to privacy and security safeguards for user data. Still, it drew a hard line around sharing its search data and providing syndicated results or ads during the appeal period.
In short, Google is willing to comply with some guardrails, but it is resisting anything it believes could weaken its competitive edge in an irreversible way.
Follow TechBSB For More Updates
