The federal prosecutors argued in court on Wednesday that Google should divest its Chrome browser, share its data and search results with competitors, and could potentially even sell Android to eliminate its monopoly over online search.

These proposals are part of an important case in Washington that could change how people access information online. If enforced, these measures would last for up to ten years and would be monitored by a court-appointed team to address what the overseeing judge flagged as an illegal monopoly in search and advertising within the U.S., where Google handles around 90% of all searches.

“Google’s illegal actions have not only restricted essential distribution channels for competitors but also prevented potential partnerships that could help new entrants into these markets,” stated the Justice Department and state antitrust officials in their court filing on Wednesday.

One of their proposed changes is to put an end to exclusive contracts where Google pays billions each year to Apple and other manufacturers to ensure its search engine is set as the default option on their devices.

In response, Google called the suggestions shocking in a statement issued Thursday.

“The DOJ’s proposed actions would lead to an unparalleled level of government interference that would negatively impact American consumers, developers, and small businesses, while also risking the U.S.’s position in global economic and technological leadership at a crucial time,” said Kent Walker, Chief Legal Officer of Alphabet.

A trial to investigate these proposals is set by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta for April. However, the incoming president and the new antitrust head from the Justice Department might alter the direction of the case.

Technical Oversight

The proposed changes are extensive, including a five-year ban on Google re-entering the browser market and a requirement for Google to sell its Android operating system if needed to restore competition. The Justice Department is also seeking to prevent Google from acquiring or investing in rival search engines, query-based AI technologies, or advertising services.

Additionally, publishers and websites would have the ability to opt-out of being included in the training data for Google’s AI tools.

A five-member technical committee appointed by the judge would ensure Google complies with these measures. Google would finance this committee, which would have the authority to request documents, interview staff, and review software code, according to the filing.

These proposals aim to disrupt “a relentless cycle that further entrenches Google’s dominance,” according to prosecutors.

Impact on Chrome and Android

Chrome, recognized as the most widely used web browser globally, is crucial to Google’s operations, as it gathers user data to enhance targeted advertising.

Prosecutors argue that Google has leveraged both Chrome and Android to favor its search engine over its competitors. In contrast, Google contends that selling its Chrome and Android platforms, which utilize open-source coding and are free to use, would harm companies that have built their services based on these products.

The proposed regulations would prevent Google from making it mandatory for Android devices to include its search engine or AI services.

Google has the option to sell the software instead of adhering to the compliance measures, but any potential buyers would need approval from the DOJ and state antitrust authorities.

Google will have an opportunity to present its recommendations in December.

Data Sharing Requirements

Under the proposed regulations, Google would be required to license its search results to competitors at a minimal fee and provide user data without cost. The company would also be prohibited from gathering user information that it cannot share due to privacy issues.

These proposals were developed after discussions with companies that compete with Google, including DuckDuckGo.

“We believe this is a significant development that will lower competition barriers,” stated Kamyl Bazbaz, DuckDuckGo’s head of public affairs.

DuckDuckGo has previously accused Google of evading European Union mandates concerning data sharing. Google has replied that it would not betray user trust by providing competitors with sensitive information.

(This story was revised to include updated information.)