Google seeks temporary halt on search data sharing as antitrust appeal moves ahead

Alphabet-owned Google has asked a US federal court to pause an order requiring it to share key search-related data with competitors, arguing that enforcement at this stage could permanently expose proprietary information while the company challenges a landmark antitrust ruling.

In a filing submitted on Friday, the company informed the court that it intends to appeal a 2024 decision delivered by US District Judge Amit Mehta, who found that Google had illegally maintained its dominance in the online search market. The appeal is expected to be taken up by a federal appeals court, with Google seeking to overturn both the finding and parts of the remedy framework.

The request focuses narrowly on the data-sharing requirement imposed as part of the remedies. Under the ruling, Google would be required to share certain categories of search data with rival firms, including those building generative artificial intelligence products. Google has argued that this measure risks revealing trade secrets and sensitive operational details that cannot be retrieved if the decision is later reversed.

The company has asked that only this portion of the order be stayed during the appeal. It has not sought a delay on other elements of the ruling. These include restrictions on agreements that allow Google to preload its applications, such as its Gemini AI chatbot, on devices. As directed by the court, such agreements would be limited to a maximum term of one year.

Google has indicated that it is willing to comply with all other aspects of the ruling during the appeals process, apart from granting competitors access to its data, syndicated search results or advertising systems.

The case represents one of the most significant antitrust actions brought against Google in the United States. While the court concluded that the company holds multiple illegal monopolies, the immediate operational impact on its business has so far been contained.

The US Department of Justice and a coalition of states that pursued the case now face a February 3 deadline to decide whether to appeal Judge Mehta’s rejection of tougher remedies. Prosecutors had sought more aggressive steps, including forcing Google to divest its Chrome browser and end multibillion-dollar payments to device makers such as Apple that make Google the default search engine.

As the appeal progresses, the outcome is expected to have far-reaching implications for competition policy and the regulation of dominant digital platforms in the US.