If you are wondering whether the Google antitrust ruling changes how you should do SEO this week, the short answer is no. On 5 August 2024, a US federal judge ruled that Google broke antitrust law to keep its monopoly in search. But nothing about how Google ranks pages has changed, and any changes to Google’s business are still months or years away.
What the ruling does is open a door. The next phase will decide what Google must change, and some of the options could affect which search engines people use and where your traffic comes from. In this article I explain what the court decided, what it did not decide, and what I think site owners and marketers should do now.
What the Google Antitrust Ruling Says
The case is United States v. Google. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) filed it in October 2020, joined by a group of states. A separate group of states, led by Colorado, filed a similar case in December 2020, and the court handled the two together.
Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia heard the case without a jury. The trial started in September 2023 and ran for more than two months, with closing arguments in May 2024. His ruling came out on 5 August 2024.
The core finding is clear. In the judge’s words: “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.” He found that Google broke Section 2 of the Sherman Act, the US law that makes it illegal to keep a monopoly through unfair conduct.
The Two Markets Google Was Found to Monopolize
Antitrust cases depend on how the court defines the “market”. The judge found that Google holds monopoly power in two markets:
- General search services. This means search engines like Google, Bing and DuckDuckGo, which try to answer any question. The court found Google has about 89.2% of this market overall, and about 94.9% on mobile.
- General search text ads. These are the text ads that appear on a search results page, the kind you buy in Google Ads. The court found Google used its power here to charge prices higher than it could in a competitive market.
Google had argued for a much wider market that included sites like Amazon and social media apps, where people also look for things. The judge did not accept that.
The Problem Was the Default Deals
Being big is not illegal. The court said the problem was how Google protected its position.
Google pays browser makers, phone makers and mobile carriers to make Google the default search engine. The default is the engine you get when you type in the address bar or search box without changing any settings. These deals usually pay partners a share of the search ad revenue Google earns on their devices.
The court found that Google paid more than $26 billion in 2021 for these default positions. The best-known deal is with Apple, which makes Google the default in Safari. The ruling noted that Google paid Apple $20 billion in 2022.
The judge found that these agreements were exclusive in practice. They shut rivals out of the most valuable places to get searches, especially on phones. That meant rivals could not get enough users and data to improve, which kept Google ahead.
The Role of Scale and Data
One idea runs through the whole ruling: scale. A search engine gets better by seeing more searches and more user behaviour, such as what people click.
The court accepted that this creates a cycle. More users bring more data, more data improves results, and better results keep users. Default deals fed that cycle for Google and starved it for everyone else.
For SEO people, this is worth noting. During the trial, Google’s own engineers spoke about how user interaction data feeds into search quality. If you followed the discussion after the Google Search API leak in May, this ruling adds more context to why clicks and user signals keep coming up.
What the Court Did Not Decide
A lot of headlines make the ruling sound bigger than it is right now. Here is what it did not do.
- It did not set any penalty or fix. The ruling covers only liability, meaning whether Google broke the law. What Google must change is a separate step called the remedies phase.
- It did not say Google has a monopoly in all search advertising. The court found a wider “search advertising” market exists, but said Google does not have monopoly power in it.
- It rejected the claim about Search Ads 360. The states had argued Google unfairly limited Microsoft features in its ad management tool. The judge found Google had no legal duty to help a rival there.
- It did not say Google’s product is bad. The judge accepted that Google is a high-quality search engine. The issue was the conduct used to protect its share.
The judge also criticised Google for not keeping some internal chat messages, but he chose not to punish Google for it in this ruling.
What Happens Next
There are two big steps ahead, and both take time.
The Remedies Phase
The judge asked both sides to propose a schedule for the remedies phase, with a hearing set for early September 2024. In this phase, the government will ask for changes, Google will argue against them, and the judge will decide.
Nobody knows yet what the remedies will be. Ideas being discussed publicly include:
- Limiting or banning payments for default search placement.
- Requiring choice screens, where users pick a search engine when they set up a phone or browser.
- Requiring Google to share some search data with rivals.
- Bigger structural changes to Google’s business, which some commentators have raised.
I would treat all of these as possibilities, not predictions. The judge has full discretion, and he has not given any hint of his choice.
The Appeal
Google has said it will appeal. Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, said the decision recognises that Google offers the best search engine but concludes that Google “shouldn’t be allowed to make it easily available”.
An appeal would first go to the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and possibly to the Supreme Court after that. Appeals in cases this size can take a long time. So even after the remedies phase, changes may not take effect quickly.
On the other side, the DOJ called the decision a historic win. You can read the Justice Department’s statement on the decision for the government’s view in its own words.
What the Google Antitrust Ruling Means for SEO
Here is my honest view. For the next several months, your SEO work should not change because of this case. Google’s ranking systems, guidelines and core updates are not part of the ruling.
The longer-term picture is more interesting. The case is about one thing: how people end up on Google in the first place. If that changes, where your traffic comes from could change too.
Possible Effects of Ending Default Deals
Imagine a future where Google can no longer pay to be the default in Safari or on Android phones. A few things could follow:
- More users on other search engines. If phones show a choice screen, some people may pick Bing, DuckDuckGo or another option. Most will probably still pick Google, but even a small shift matters at this scale.
- New deals with other engines. Apple and browser makers might sign deals with other providers, or build their own search features.
- Room for AI search tools. Newer products like OpenAI’s SearchGPT prototype are trying to win searches. Easier access to default spots could help them grow.
None of this is certain. Habits are strong, and many people choose Google on purpose. But in my experience, it is cheaper to prepare for a change early than to react late.
What It Could Mean for Paid Search
The court found that Google charged more for text ads than it could have in a competitive market. If remedies bring more competition, advertisers could, in theory, see more options and pricing pressure over time.
I would not plan your budget around that. For now, keep an eye on the remedies phase and on any growth in ad platforms outside Google.
What It Does Not Change
A common question is whether the ruling means Google will stop showing its own features, like AI Overviews, in results. It does not. The case was about distribution deals and ad pricing, not about what Google shows on the results page.
So AI Overviews and their effect on clicks remain a separate issue. That one affects your traffic today, while the antitrust case is a longer-term story.
What I Recommend Site Owners Do Now
The best response to an uncertain future is to reduce your dependence on one source of traffic. Here is a simple plan I would follow. None of it is wasted effort, whatever the court decides.
- Check where your search traffic comes from. In GA4, open the traffic acquisition report and filter for organic search. Note the share coming from Google, Bing, DuckDuckGo, Yahoo and others. This is your baseline.
- Set up Bing Webmaster Tools. If you have not done it, verify your site. You can import your site from Search Console in a few minutes. It shows how Bing crawls and indexes your pages, and Bing also powers results for some other search tools.
- Submit your sitemap to Bing. Then check for crawl errors and pages that are not indexed. Sites often look fine in Google but have gaps in Bing.
- Look at how you rank outside Google. Search your top keywords in Bing and DuckDuckGo. If you rank well in Google but poorly elsewhere, find out why.
- Track referrals from AI tools. Watch for traffic from chat and AI search products in your referral reports. It is small for most sites today, but it is worth seeing the trend.
- Build traffic you own. Grow your email list and direct visits. These do not depend on which search engine a phone uses.
- Set a reminder to review. Check your traffic mix again after the remedies phase moves forward. Compare it with your baseline.
When I look at a new site’s analytics, I almost always find that Bing has been ignored. It is a quick fix, and it is the most practical step you can take in response to this case.
Why Other Search Engines Deserve More Attention
For years, many SEOs, me included, have treated Bing as an afterthought. That made sense when Google had close to 90% of searches and the rest felt like noise.
But Bing has been adding AI features since early 2023, which I covered in the new Bing with AI chat. Bing’s index is also used by other search products. So optimising for Bing can help you show up in more places than the Bing homepage.
The good news is that the basics are the same. Clear titles, helpful content, clean technical setup and good internal linking work across engines. You don’t need a separate strategy. You need to check that the other engines can find and understand your site.
A Practical Example
Say you run a small online store and 95% of your organic traffic comes from Google. That is normal today. But it means your business depends on one company’s deals with Apple and Android phone makers.
If a choice screen moves even a few percent of mobile users to other engines, you want to already be indexed and ranking there. Spending an afternoon on Bing Webmaster Tools now is a small cost against that risk.
Common Myths About the Ruling
I have seen a lot of confusion in the past day, so here are a few quick corrections.
- “Google is being broken up.” No decision on that exists. The remedies phase has not started yet.
- “Google will lose rankings power.” The ruling does not touch ranking systems or how Google treats websites.
- “Apple will switch to Bing.” Nothing in the ruling forces Apple to pick another engine. Any change to the Apple deal depends on remedies and appeals.
- “This is the case about Google’s ad tech.” No. That is a separate DOJ case about Google’s display advertising tools. This ruling is about search.
Conclusion
The Google antitrust ruling is one of the most important legal decisions about search in decades. The court found that Google kept its search monopoly through default deals worth tens of billions of dollars a year. But it has not yet decided what Google must change, and Google plans to appeal.
For SEO, nothing changes today. My advice is to use this as a prompt to check your traffic mix, set up Bing Webmaster Tools if you haven’t, and track new sources like AI search. If you want to see the kind of competitor that could benefit most from changes to default deals, read my look at OpenAI’s SearchGPT prototype.
