Key Points
- Google asked a judge to delay a data-sharing order while it appeals a ruling that found it illegally monopolises online search.
- The company argues data release could expose trade secrets before the appeal is resolved.
- The underlying antitrust case may lead to broader remedies or shifts in how dominant tech platforms are regulated.
Alphabet’s Google asked a U.S. federal judge to pause enforcement of a court order requiring the company to share data with competitors while it appeals a ruling that found its online search business an illegal monopoly. Google cited fears that complying could irreversibly expose trade secrets to rivals before the appeals process plays out.
The request was filed in Washington, where U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta previously ruled in 2024 that Google used unlawful tactics to maintain dominance in search and ordered wide-ranging remedies. Those remedies include sharing data with competitors — including AI companies such as OpenAI — to level the playing field.
Google said it will vigorously contest the underlying judgment and wants the data-sharing requirement stayed until the federal appeals court reviews the case. The company argued that sensitive information could be lost forever if it complies now and later wins the appeal. Google is not seeking delays on other remedies, such as shortening the length of contracts that preload apps like its AI tools on devices.
The antitrust battle stems from a long-running lawsuit in which authorities said Google unfairly preserved its search dominance by using exclusionary agreements and tactics that disadvantaged rivals. The contested data-sharing remedy is intended to open up competition by giving rivals access to critical information and results.
Google’s filing signals how aggressively the company plans to defend itself against what it views as excessive corrective measures. The company’s lawyers say that some remedies could harm innovation and user privacy if ordered before legal reviews conclude.
Both the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and a coalition of states that brought the case have until early February 2026 to decide whether to appeal the judge’s rejection of stronger remedies, such as forcing Google to sell its Chrome browser or ending default search deals with mobile partners.
Industry watchers see this antitrust fight as one of the most consequential in technology law. They say the outcome could reshape how major platforms with dominant gateways to information are regulated and how rivals access essential data to compete effectively.
