The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to ask Google to ditch its Chrome browser as part of its ongoing antitrust case, according to a court filing on Friday.

The proposal says Google must “promptly and fully divest Chrome, along with any assets or services necessary to successfully complete the divestiture, to a buyer approved by the plaintiffs in their sole discretion, subject to terms that the court and plaintiffs approve.” It would also require Google to stop paying for preferential treatment of its search engine.

However, the DOJ has softened its stance on AI, dropping the requirement for the company to mandatorily divest its AI investments. Instead, Google will be required to provide prior notification for any future investments. Additionally, the DOJ will leave the decision on whether Google must divest its Android assets up to the courts.

The DOJ sued Google during U.S. President Donald Trump’s first term in office, alleging monopolistic behavior in online search and advertising. According to the entity, Google paid $26.3 billion to companies like Apple in 2021 alone to secure its position as the default search engine on mobile devices and online browsers. In August last year, Google was found liable and now the case is moving into the remedy phase, which will begin in April.

Among the proposed rulings the DOJ first submitted to the judge were prevent Google from investing in potential competitors, such as advertising rivals, search-linked AI tools or other search engines, in addition to forcing it to ditch Chrome and end default search agreements. The DOJ also recommended prohibiting the tech giant from giving its search products preferential access to related products or services it owns or controls, such as Android, and conducting a five-year review to evaluate progress in search engine competition. If competition hasn’t improved, the DOJ suggested forcing Google to sell Android.

For Scott Atkinson, SVP of digital investment at Publicis Media Canada, Chrome sale is “a proposal so this is all a ‘what if’ scenario. Especially when considering that we are awaiting the confirmation of a Trump appointee to the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division.” However, Atkinson believes “the proposals increase the risk user privacy and security by forcing data sharing across multiple platforms, potential fragment of the ad stack and developer stacks, increase complexity and nuance in the search ecosystem and may increase spend for the same reach.”

“We recommend a wait-and-see-approach by marketers to gauge how these recommendations are received by the judge in the April hearing and the impact of a new DOJ Antitrust appointee,” he adds.

Meanwhile, Robin LeGassicke, chief transformation officer at Cairns Oneil, tells MiC that with the potential sale of Chrome, the long-standing agreements many operating systems, phone and laptop companies have with the company as their default browser may come to an end.

“This creates a huge opportunity for other browsers to gain market share. When this starts to happen, marketers can and should be diversifying their spends where they can. Testing the various platforms and algorithms for performance,” LeGassicke says. “It also depends on who purchases Chrome… if Microsoft is the one to bite, there would be a seismic shift in SOV for them and their reach. This could also create an opportunity for other players to enter the marketplace, as marketers are looking to test new waters.”

Damian Rollison, director of market insights at Soci, a digital marketing platform that helps companies manage their online presence and create content for their social media audiences, agrees. Rollison tells MiC that the lawsuit threatens Google’s ability to maintain its position as the default choice for users, which may mean that other platforms will become more appealing for consumers and thus for advertisers.

“The biggest impact would probably be felt not from the divestiture of Chrome but from the separation of search from advertising, where presumably the sponsored content side of Google Search would be opened up to much more competition,” he says. “A forced sale of Chrome itself would likely have the biggest impact on advertisers in terms of how its new leadership treats controversial tools like third-party cookies, but it’s hard to know which direction that will go at this point.”