Skip to content 
Just think about it. One morning, you wake up to a message: pay ₹50/month to use Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp. Meta wants a subscription. You try accessing your favorite app and boom – locked out. You cave in and pay because, well, what other choice do you have?
That’s the thing about monopolies. They don’t offer options. They dominate.
India alone has over 462 million social media users. A mandatory subscription would funnel billions into Meta’s profits. But this isn’t about Meta. This is about all the big tech companies.
Currently Google is in the spotlight due to its monopolistic activities and apparently at the center of that storm is Chrome.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has already accused Google of running monopolies in both search and advertising. Courts have ruled against Google in key cases, and the next big step could shake the internet to its core: forcing Google to sell Chrome, its crown jewel.
But what’s wrong with the monopoly? Why DOJ wants to break Google?
Google isn’t just a dominant tech company. It’s the gatekeeper of the internet.
Search, ads, browsers — it’s built a sprawling empire that decides what you see, what you don’t, and how much you pay along the way. And for years, it’s gotten away with quietly tightening that grip. But now, regulators, competitors, and consumers are all asking the same question: how did we let this happen?
Let’s start with Chrome. Google launched it in 2008. Fast forward to today, and it powers nearly two-thirds of all web browsing. Not because it’s the only good browser out there, but because Google paid to make it the only one people see.
In 2021 alone, Google spent $26 billion to secure its position as the default search engine — across iPhones, Android phones, browsers like Safari and Firefox, and voice assistants. Apple alone is reportedly paid $18 billion every year just to keep Google front and center.
And changing the default isn’t exactly easy. On Android, it can take up to seven taps buried deep in settings. Most people don’t bother. Which is exactly what Google wants.
The result? Google controls 94.9% of mobile search traffic in the U.S. Globally, it owns nearly 90% of all search queries. That scale gives it a massive advantage in data collection, which powers its ad business.
And that brings us to advertising — where things get even worse.
The DOJ says Google has overcharged advertisers by nearly $2 billion since 2019. That’s a hidden tax on the entire economy. Businesses end up paying more to reach customers. And those extra costs? They’re quietly added to your bill at checkout.
But here’s the kicker: Google doesn’t just run the ads — it runs the entire ecosystem.
- It owns the tool publishers use to sell ads (DoubleClick).
- It owns the exchange where ads are bought and sold (AdX).
- It owns the platform advertisers use to place bids (DV360).
In other words, it owns the entire stadium, sells the tickets, controls the scoreboard, and plays in the game.
Former Google execs have even compared the setup to “running the New York Stock Exchange while trading on it.” And it shows. Google can prioritize its own services, squeeze margins from both buyers and sellers, and shut out rivals trying to offer better or more ethical alternatives.
And it doesn’t stop there.
According to testimony during the DOJ trial, Google has gone so far as to discourage companies — especially phone manufacturers and telecom providers — from partnering with rival search engines or AI companies. CEOs like Perplexity’s Aravind Srinivas have said outright that potential partners refused meetings out of fear that Google would retaliate by reducing their revenue-share deals.
This kind of behavior stifles competition long before it even begins. If a startup can’t strike partnerships, it can’t reach users. And if it can’t reach users, it can’t scale. That’s how monopolies stay monopolies — not just by winning, but by making sure no one else even gets to play.
Critics like Sarah Kay Wiley from CheckMyAds call out Google’s so-called privacy shield as a smokescreen — a narrative designed to keep regulators at bay while user data is collected and weaponized at scale.
Karina Montoya from the Open Markets Institute points to conceptual advertising as a better model — one that doesn’t require surveillance. But good luck growing that when Google owns the pipes, the faucet, and the water.
And here’s what that monopoly means for the rest of us:
- The internet gets flooded with low-quality, junky ads
- Prices rise as ad costs balloon
- Independent journalism loses revenue and collapses behind paywalls
- Innovation slows as new players are pushed out before they start
This isn’t just a tech problem. It’s an information problem. It’s a consumer problem. It’s a democracy problem.
Google’s monopoly has distorted how we access information, how businesses grow, and how the digital economy works.
And now the US government wants to end this and wants Google to sell its crown Chrome.
So, who wants Chrome? And why would anyone want to buy a free browser?
The answer lies in power, data, and distribution.
The making of a monopolist
Google launched Chrome in 2008. Back then, it was just the new kid in the browser block. But Google played the long game. It bundled Chrome with Android. It poured billions into deals with Apple, Samsung, Mozilla, and telecom providers. In 2021 alone, it spent $26 billion just to make sure Google Search remained the default.
That strategy paid off. Today:
- Chrome commands nearly 65% of global browser share
- On mobile, its dominance is even stronger due to Android
- In the U.S., Google handles 94.9% of mobile searches
And here’s why it matters: almost 80% of Alphabet’s $283 billion revenue in 2022 came from ads. Chrome fuels that engine by collecting data, tracking user behavior, and reinforcing Google Search’s dominance.
It’s not just a browser. It’s a surveillance tool, a distribution channel, and a fortress of monetization.
The DOJ vs. Google: what the court said
In 2020, the Trump-era DOJ filed a landmark case against Google. It accused the company of stifling search competition through exclusionary contracts. In 2023 and 2024, courts agreed.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema didn’t mince words. She wrote:
“Google has wilfully engaged in a series of anti-competitive acts to acquire and maintain monopoly power in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets for open-web display advertising.”
That’s legal jargon for: Google built a fortress. Then rigged the game.
The DOJ argues that Chrome, Google Search, and its advertising tools (DoubleClick, AdX, DV360) are all deeply intertwined. Google controls the tools publishers use to sell ads, the platform advertisers use to buy them, and the browser most consumers use to view them.
The result? A chokehold on the internet.
Why Chrome is up for grabs
The DOJ isn’t just looking for a fine. It wants structural remedies. That could include breaking up Google’s ad tech empire and forcing a sale of Chrome. And while such remedies could take years to finalize, the courtroom has already opened the door to that possibility.
Chrome’s real value lies in its role as a distribution highway. Whoever controls the browser can:
- Set default search engines
- Push their apps and services
- Track user behavior
- Drive traffic to owned products
This makes Chrome one of the most strategic digital assets in existence.
The bidders: who wants Chrome?
1. Perplexity AI: the new kid with big ambitions
Aravind Srinivas, the CEO of Perplexity, doesn’t want to build a better search engine. He wants to build an agent — one that acts for you across the internet.
And he believes the browser is the future battlefield. “A browser is essentially a containerized operating system,” he says. It can:
- Access third-party services via hidden tabs
- Scrape and analyze pages
- Perform actions on your behalf
Perplexity is already building its own browser, Comet. But owning Chrome would catapult it into billions of devices overnight. At trial, the company’s Chief Business Officer confirmed they’d be interested in buying Chrome if it were up for sale.
Srinivas has had doors opened recently – a pre-install deal with Motorola, for instance, only materialized because regulators began scrutinizing Google’s stranglehold. “If Google hadn’t gone through the DOJ trial,” he said, “telcos wouldn’t have even taken our calls.”
On the other hand, Perplexity has grander ambitions too. Buying Chrome isn’t just about growth — it’s a statement. The company believes it can do what Google did two decades ago: reimagine how we search, browse, and interact with the web.
2. OpenAI: search, but smarter
Nick Turley, OpenAI’s head of product, testified that OpenAI would be interested in Chrome. They already offer browsing features in ChatGPT and have been rumored to be developing a browser.
Now here’s the interesting bit — ChatGPT, OpenAI’s flagship product, is trained on vast amounts of text, which makes it incredibly good at responding conversationally. But it has one big blind spot: real-time, up-to-date information.
Unlike Google, OpenAI doesn’t have access to a massive web index or live search APIs. Google keeps those behind closed doors — understandably, it doesn’t want to arm a competitor.
That means ChatGPT sometimes works with outdated or incomplete data. OpenAI wants to fix this. Its dream? Build its own search engine capable of handling 80% of user queries. But that’s still a few years out.
So, for now, the next best move would be to own the browser itself. Chrome, with billions of users and endless streams of fresh data, could become the default delivery vehicle for ChatGPT. Every new tab could open with an AI assistant built-in. Every interaction, click, and scroll would help fine-tune its responses.
That’s a data goldmine — one that could take OpenAI’s learning loop to the next level. In short, Chrome would not just supercharge OpenAI’s growth; it could completely redefine how we experience the internet.
3. Yahoo: comeback ambitions
Yahoo may seem like a relic, but under Apollo Global Management, it wants back in the game. It has its own browser prototype. Buying Chrome would fast-track distribution.
Yahoo’s GM of Search, Brian Provost, testified they’d be willing to invest tens of billions with Apollo’s backing.
DuckDuckGo’s CEO Gabriel Weinberg estimates Chrome could be worth $50 billion. That’s a hefty price tag, but the scale makes it worth it.
What happens if Chrome is spun off?
The fallout could be seismic:
- Search opens up: Chrome owners can pick their own default engine. Suddenly, Google isn’t the default.
- Ad innovation: New models could emerge. With Chrome no longer locked to Google’s ad tools, publishers may get better deals.
- Privacy reform: A new Chrome owner might emphasize privacy-first experiences.
- More accessible content: Less reliance on paywalls if publishers make more from ads.
History rhymes: Microsoft 1998 vs Google 2025?
Microsoft faced antitrust action in 1998 for bundling Internet Explorer with Windows. It avoided a breakup, but was forced to open up the platform. That ruling led to the rise of Firefox, Chrome, and a more competitive browser market.
Now, the shoe is on Google’s foot.
But breaking up Big Tech isn’t easy. Even after losing antitrust cases in Europe, Google paid billions but remained intact. The U.S. case is different — because this time, regulators aren’t just asking for money. They want to unbundle.
The road ahead
Google will fight hard. It will appeal. It will delay. But cracks are forming.
The case against Google has united Republicans and Democrats. Trump-supporting senators like JD Vance back antitrust action. Biden appointed Lina Khan, a fierce Big Tech critic, to lead the FTC. Even voters are fed up — 59% of Americans supported breaking up Big Tech in a 2021 poll.
And while the final decision may be years away, the message is clear: monopolies are being challenged.
