Open Markets Urges Appeals Court to Restore Competition in Search as Google Extends Its Gatekeeper Power into AI

OMI amicus brief argues Google should not be allowed to preserve its search monopoly through billions in default-placement payments 

The Open Markets Institute today filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to prohibit Google from continuing to pay billions of dollars each year to preserve its monopoly over internet search, arguing that allowing the company to keep buying default placement would undermine one of the most significant antitrust victories against Big Tech in decades. Further, as Google increasingly integrates artificial intelligence into Search, restoring competition has become even more important for the future of the digital economy. 

The brief supports the U.S. Department of Justice and state attorneys general in defending the district court's landmark finding that Google illegally maintained its monopoly through exclusionary agreements with device manufacturers and browser developers. But it argues the court's proposed remedy falls short because Google would still be allowed to pay companies such as Apple and browser developers to make Google Search the default search engine—a position that most users never change. 

"An illegal monopoly isn't fixed if the monopolist can simply keep writing the same checks that built it," said Tara Pincock, Policy Counsel at the Open Markets Institute and the author of the brief. "Google's durable dominance wasn't inevitable; it was purchased. If the court allows those payments to continue, the remedy will leave the monopoly largely intact instead of restoring genuine competition." 

The brief argues that Google's payment agreements function as exclusive dealing arrangements that deny rivals meaningful access to users. Because Google is a deep-pocketed monopolist and can afford to pay far more than any competitor can, continuing to permit those payments would preserve the very system the court found unlawful. It also urges the court to reject the concept that dominant technology companies deserve lighter antitrust scrutiny, noting that decades of weak enforcement in digital markets have produced more concentrated industries, less competition, and fewer opportunities for new innovators. 

The implications of this case reach well beyond today's search market. Search has become the foundation for Google's next generation of AI products, giving the company enormous influence over how people discover information, businesses reach customers, publishers reach readers, and emerging AI competitors reach users. The remedies adopted in this case will help determine whether that next generation of digital gatekeeping is governed by competition or by monopoly. 

"Our top concern here is whether antitrust remedies will be strong enough to restore fair competitive markets before today's search monopoly becomes tomorrow's AI monopoly,” Pincock said. “The law requires remedies that reopen markets, not ones that allow monopolists to keep paying for the advantages they were found to have obtained unlawfully." 

Open Markets has long advocated stronger antitrust enforcement against dominant digital gatekeepers. Through its research, legal advocacy, and policy work, OMI has documented how Google's monopoly power in search and digital advertising has enabled it to shape online commerce and the flow of information. More recently, Open Markets has warned that Google's integration of AI into Search risks extending that gatekeeper power into the next era of the internet unless competition is restored. 

###