Publishers' antitrust suits over Google AI search dismissed, court says traffic expectation is no agreement
With the antitrust route rejected, publishers' answer to AI-driven traffic loss shifts toward legislation and paid licensing; watch whether they appeal.
ImportanceMaterialEvidenceE3 inspectableWrite-upStandard
A US federal judge has dismissed publishers' antitrust suits over Google's AI search features, holding that free content in exchange for traffic is not an agreement but simply how a search engine works.
Per The Verge's October 1 report, US District Judge Amit Mehta, who ruled in 2024 that Google illegally monopolized search, dismissed the two suits on Wednesday (September 30), filed last year by online education company Chegg and Rolling Stone parent Penske Media; Reuters reported the ruling earlier.
The suits accused Google of coercing publishers into supplying content for AI Overviews, the AI summaries at the top of search results, for free or risk disappearing from search. Per the ruling as quoted by The Verge: "an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works." Mehta wrote he was not unsympathetic to publishers, but antitrust rules cannot replace a legislative decision on the economic impact of new innovation.
Publishers' traffic declines continue. This week The Information reported that Google is paying around 100 publishers for their contributions to AI Overviews, AI Mode and Gemini as part of a pilot program. The Verge itself is part of plaintiff Penske Media; the report does not say whether the plaintiffs will appeal.