Mulholland says that the DOJ’s proposal would hurt U.S. citizens, impact America’s lead in global tech, and force the company to share users’ private search queries with foreign and domestic companies that compete with Google. She rightfully claims that the DOJ’s approach would end up disrupting Google’s ability to improve its products through innovation. Google’s proposals do not come close to the government’s desire to break up the company.
“We don’t propose these changes lightly. They would come at a cost to our partners by regulating how they must go about picking the best search engine for their customers. And they would impose burdensome restrictions and oversight over contracts that have reduced prices for devices and supported innovation in rival browsers, both of which have been good for consumers. But we believe that they fully address the Court’s findings, and do so without putting Americans’ privacy and security at risk or harming America’s global technology leadership.”-Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs
If the government gets its way, Google might have to spin off Chrome. | Image credit-PhoneArena
For example, there would be multiple default agreements across different platforms and different browsing modes. With this in mind, the iPhone and the iPad would each get their own default search engine. And following the Court’s decision that under antitrust law a 12-month agreement would be considered reasonable, search engine deals with Google’s partners would last for one year.
Google also proposes giving device makers more flexibility in preloading multiple search engines on Android devices and allowing them to preload any Google app regardless of whether they decide to preinstall Search or Chrome on their Android products. Lee-Anne writes that this will give rivals such as Microsoft more opportunities to make deals with device makers to preinstall their apps.
The company also says that it will create “a robust mechanism” to ensure that it complies with the Court’s order without giving the government excessive power over how consumers create their online experiences.
