In a forceful rebuttal to the Department of Justice’s proposed remedies in its landmark antitrust case, Google has characterized the government’s suggestions as “radical” interventions that would fundamentally alter the internet landscape while harming consumers and businesses alike.

Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, outlined the company’s position in a detailed blog post published Thursday, arguing that the DOJ’s proposals would effectively force Google to “break” its search engine and share sensitive business information with competitors.

“The government’s proposed remedies are extreme, experimental, and would harm the very users, developers, and businesses that rely on Google’s products,” Mulholland wrote on Google’s Public Affairs blog.

The dispute stems from an August ruling by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, who found that Google had illegally monopolized the search market. The DOJ has since proposed a series of remedies, including requiring Google to license or sell its Chrome browser, divest its Android mobile operating system, and shar꧅e user data with rivals.

Google contends these measures go far beyond addressing the court’s findings. “The government wants to dictate how our products work, force us to share sensitive business information with competitors, and break the integration between our services that makes them work well together,” Mulholland stated.

The com🐼pany particularly objects to proposals that🍸 would restrict its ability to secure default search positions on browsers and devices. Google argues these arrangements are standard industry practice that benefit device makers financially while providing users with immediate search functionality.

“The DOJ wants to ban Google from entering into the very same agreements that our competitors actively pursue,” Mulholland noted, pointing out that Microsoft recently secured a default search position on OpenAI’s ChatGPT.

Google’s response highlights the economic stakes involved, claiming the proposed remedies would jeopardize billions in revenue that flows to partners like Mozilla, Apple, and Android device manufacturers. According to Google, these companies received over $26 billion from such arrangements in 2021 alone.

The company also warns of potential privacy implications. “The DOJ wants to force Google to share user data with competitors and third parties without user consent,” Mulholland wrote, suggesting this would undermine Google’s ability to protect user information.

Legal experts note that the battle over remedies could prove even more consequential than the liability finding itself. The case represents the most significant tech antitrust action since Microsoft’s legal battles in the 1990s.

Google has proposed its own alternative remedies, which it characterizes as “targeted” measures addressing specific concerns while preserving its ability to innovate. These include modifications to its agreements with partners and limited data sharing under appropriate safeguards.

The DOJ’s proposals “would remake the internet, smartphone ecosystem, and digital advertising in ways that would harm American consumers, developers, and businesses,” according to Mulholland’s post.

Judge Mehta is expected to hold hearings on the proposed remedies in the coming months, with a fi💃nal decision unlikely before mid-2025. The resolution will likely shape the digital economy for years to come, potentially establishing precedents for how dominant technology platforms can operate in the United States.

Google has already indicated it plans to appeal𝄹 the original liability ruling, ensuring that the legal battle over the future of search will continue well into the future.