Alphabet’s Google filed an appeal on Friday in response to a Washington federal court ruling that found the company unlawfully maintained monopolies in online search and related advertising. The appeal targets legal conclusions reached by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in a 2024 decision, and seeks to overturn both liability findings and the remedies he ordered.
In its appellate filing, Google argued that Judge Mehta erred legally when concluding the company illegally blocked competitors by paying billions of dollars each year to companies, including Apple, to set Google as the default search provider on new devices. The company maintained that those commercial arrangements did not foreclose device manufacturers or browser developers from promoting alternative search services, including Microsoft’s Bing.
Google also framed its position in market-performance terms, asserting it succeeded because it built a superior search product. The company described that outcome as the result of "hard work, bold innovation, and shrewd business decisions," and said those factors explain its market standing rather than any unlawful exclusionary conduct.
The court-ordered remedy at issue would require Google to share certain search data with competitors to restore competitive dynamics in search and search advertising. That sharing could extend to companies working in artificial intelligence, with OpenAI cited as a possible recipient in the judge’s remedy. A decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Google’s favor would nullify that data-sharing requirement.
The Department of Justice is expected to file papers laying out its own arguments in July; a DOJ spokesperson declined to comment. If the appeals court upholds Judge Mehta’s ruling against Google, the company could seek further review from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Context and implications
The appeal initiates the next procedural phase in a high-profile antitrust dispute, with potential consequences for how search-related data is shared and how large platform firms structure distribution agreements with device makers and browsers. The appellate court’s handling of legal questions raised by Google will determine whether a data-sharing remedy stands or is set aside.