"Losing" Android, will it be the "unbearable burden" after Google's defeat?

The federal judge of the District of Columbia in the United States announced a ruling on Monday, finding that Google's search business violated U.S. antitrust laws, which means Google's dominant position in the search market for decades may be overturned.

However, according to media reports, the Department of Justice will not only seek to weaken the lucrative alliance between Google and Apple, but in the next phase of the case involving punishment for Google's illegal monopoly, the Department of Justice may also try to prevent Google from dominating the next generation of search technology - conversational artificial intelligence, and make it easier for competitors' search providers to weaken Google's 95% market share in the search market.

Gene Burrus, former Assistant General Counsel of Microsoft, stated that Department of Justice lawyers are almost certain to request the judge to take "structural remedies," rather than just requiring Google to make "behavioral" adjustments to its search business and its partnerships with companies like Apple, such as possibly requiring Google to divest the Android system. The judge has already indicated that the Android system has helped Google unfairly maintain its monopoly position.

Burrus stated that the Department of Justice may push for larger-scale changes, in part because this way, the government does not have to actively monitor Google's compliance with new restrictions on its core business. Past cases have shown that this kind of monitoring is difficult to achieve.

It is currently unpredictable what decision Judge Amit Mehta of the District of Columbia will make. However, Lee Hepner, a lawyer from the American Economic Liberties Project, an anti-monopoly organization, stated that many past precedents indicate that courts have been lenient towards the government's proposed remedies in difficult cases.

Media outlets have listed the requests that the Department of Justice may make to the judge:

Search Agreements

Based on Mehta's wording in the ruling, he seems prepared to cancel Google's exclusive agreements with Apple, Samsung, Firefox, and other companies, as these agreements make Google the default search provider on their devices or browsers. Department of Justice lawyers are almost certain to echo this idea in their pleadings.

The ruling on Monday has ignited hope within Microsoft, as the company also hopes to replace Google by reaching similar agreements. Since Microsoft's share in the search market is negligible, such deals are unlikely to raise antitrust concerns.

Microsoft has long tried to replace Google as the default search provider on Apple's Safari browser, but evidence presented in the Google search trial indicates that Apple has never considered Bing from Microsoft as an alternative, in part because Microsoft cannot afford to pay as much money as Google does to gain this privilege.

Google pays Apple over $20 billion annually and pays out billions of dollars to other search distribution partners. The revenue generated by searches on partner devices or browsers is used to pay these amounts. Google believes that if competitors strike similar deals with Apple, Google's search ad revenue could decrease by billions of dollars annually

Android System

Analysis suggests that while the court may attempt to dismantle the expensive agreements between Google and Apple, it may be difficult to influence Apple's actions after the court penalizes Google. This is why the Department of Justice may pursue another Google product through the court system: the Android operating system.

In the ruling, the judge frequently mentioned the role of the Android system in perpetuating Google's monopoly position, as it effectively forces companies like Samsung and others using the Android system to include Google search as an inseparable part of the device.

Currently, EU regulatory authorities have compelled Google to offer new Android customers the opportunity to choose their default search engine. However, this does not seem to have weakened Google's monopoly position.

Therefore, Department of Justice lawyers may push for the forced separation of Google from the Android system. This could reduce Google's monopoly in the mobile search market, as an independently operated Android system may not have the incentive to promote Google search.

Artificial Intelligence

Media also anticipates that Jonathan Kanter, the head of antitrust at the Department of Justice, may try to convince the judge to prevent Google from using its artificial intelligence assets to consolidate its dominance in search.

Kanter stated to the media on Thursday, "If a company has monopoly power... then there's a strong incentive" to develop new technologies like AI, "which would fortify the monopoly moat rather than break new ground."

Currently, Google has integrated conversational AI responses into its search results. One solution could be to compel Google to provide its competitors with its LLM (Large Language Models) so that they can compete more effectively in the next generation of search.

The Department of Justice may also require the judge to order Google to allow competitors to use some of Google's AI assets developed by Google to train their AI, including YouTube videos controlled by Google.

Advertising Technology and App Store

Furthermore, as the second largest source of profit for Google after its search business, the company may face punitive measures for the fees generated in the app store on devices using the Android system.

Last year, a jury ruled in a case brought by mobile game maker Epic against Google that Google had violated control over the Android app store and took a cut from revenue generated by mobile apps. The court is still reviewing potential punitive measures, but restrictions may be imposed to make it difficult for Google to maintain its app store profits.

Google also faces multiple antitrust lawsuits involving conflicts of interest in its advertising technology business, which facilitate the buying and selling of ads on websites that Google does not own. The Department of Justice is leading one of these advertising technology lawsuits, which is scheduled for trial next month