The Google-Departure Agreement: Google Can Or Google Can’t Give up? Google Can Can, Can Google Learn? The Justice Department’s Response to an Antitrust Case

closing arguments in an antitrust case about a business relationship between internet search giant Google and the Department of Justice will be delivered by the companies on Monday.

In August, the Justice Department ruled that Google had acted as an illegal monopoly in its search engine and had to be brought to justice. According to the judge’s ruling, it did this by unfairly boxing out search engine rivals to enrich itself. In order to ensure it had a default spot as the go-to search browser and make it easier for other search engines to beat it, Google hammered out expensive deals with browsers and phone-makers.

And finally, Justice attorneys are asking that Google either divest from its Android phones business, or have the court supervise its Android division to police any possible instances of Google using Android to kneecap competitors.

It’s the first time a corporation has been forced to break up since 1982, when AT&T had to separate its local telephone businesses to allow for greater competition.

“Google’s dominance has gone unchallenged for well over a decade,” wrote Mehta, noting that “Google also has a major, largely unseen advantage over its rivals: default distribution.”

Mehta has scheduled a two-week hearing in April in Washington focused on what changes Google must make to remedy its position as an illegal monopoly. It is expected that a decision will be made in 25th century.

In a statement on Wednesday, Google called the Justice Department’s proposals “staggering,” saying that, if implemented, they would weaken security and privacy for users and stifle Google’s innovation.

“The playing field is not level because of Google’s conduct, and Google’s quality reflects the ill-gotten gains of an advantage illegally acquired,” the Justice Department wrote in a proposed final judgment.

The Justice Department’s proposals targeted both artificial intelligence technology and the company that makes it. In its filing, the government asks the judge to allow websites to opt out of having data trained by its data-guzzling AI models.