Google Seeks Delay on Data-Sharing Order as It Appeals Landmark Antitrust Ruling

Alphabet’s Google has asked a federal judge to delay enforcing a key part of a landmark antitrust ruling that would require the company to share valuable search data with rivals, according to court filings submitted on Friday. The request comes as Google prepares to appeal a 2024 decision that found the company illegally maintained a monopoly in the online search market.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, based in Washington, ruled last year that Google used unlawful tactics to preserve its dominance in online search and digital advertising. As part of the remedies, the judge ordered Google to share certain data with competitors, including generative artificial intelligence firms such as OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT. Google argues that this data-sharing requirement goes too far and could cause irreversible harm if enforced before the appeal process is complete.

In its court papers, Google said complying with the data-sharing order would risk exposing trade secrets and proprietary information. The company warned that if it ultimately wins its appeal, there would be no way to undo the damage caused by releasing sensitive data to competitors. For that reason, Google is asking Judge Mehta to pause this portion of the ruling while the federal appeals court reviews the case.

Notably, Google is not seeking to delay other remedies imposed by the court. These include limits on exclusive contracts that allow Google to preload its apps, such as the Gemini AI chatbot, on devices. Under the ruling, such contracts must now be limited to one year in duration. Google said it is prepared to comply with all requirements except those involving data sharing and the provision of syndicated search results and advertisements during the appeal.

The case represents a major chapter in Google’s long-running battle with U.S. antitrust regulators. Despite findings that the company holds multiple illegal monopolies, Google has so far avoided the most severe penalties. The U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of state attorneys general, who brought the case, have until February 3 to decide whether to appeal Judge Mehta’s rejection of even stronger remedies.

Regulators had pushed for more aggressive measures, including forcing Google to sell its Chrome browser and end multibillion-dollar payments to Apple and other partners to secure default search engine status on new devices. The outcome of the appeals process could reshape the future of online search, digital competition, and the broader tech industry.