Google Requests US Judge to Postpone Data Sharing Order During Appeal

• Google specifically asked to defer data-sharing and syndication requirements, citing risk of exposing trade secrets with no recovery option if successful on appeal
• The company accepted other remedies including limiting contracts for preloading apps (like Gemini AI chatbot) to one-year duration
• The DOJ and states have until February 3 to appeal Judge Mehta's decision rejecting stronger remedies like forcing Google to sell Chrome browser or stop multibillion-dollar default search payments to Apple

Summary: Google Requests US Judge to Postpone Data Sharing Order During Appeal

Alphabet's Google asked a federal judge on Friday to postpone requirements forcing the company to share search data with competitors while it appeals an antitrust ruling. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta previously found that Google used unlawful tactics to maintain its dominance in online search.

Key Developments:

Google is requesting a stay on specific remedy provisions, particularly those requiring it to share syndicated search results and advertising data with rivals. The company argues that complying with these orders risks exposing trade secrets that cannot be recovered if it wins on appeal.

However, Google did not seek to postpone other requirements, including limiting contracts that allow preloading of apps (including its Gemini AI chatbot) to one-year durations.

Market Context:

Despite being found to hold multiple illegal monopolies, Google has largely avoided severe consequences in its antitrust battle with U.S. enforcers. The Department of Justice and coalition of states have until February 3 to decide whether to appeal Mehta's ruling, which rejected stronger remedies.

Rejected Remedies:

The antitrust enforcers originally sought more aggressive measures, including forcing Google to:

• Sell off its Chrome browser
• Cease multibillion-dollar payments to Apple and other companies for preset default search engine status on new devices

Implications:

The case highlights ongoing regulatory pressure on Big Tech but suggests Google may avoid the most severe structural breakup scenarios. The appeals process will likely extend for months or years, leaving current business operations largely intact in the near term.