Mozilla’s response to proposed remedies in U.S. v. Google | The Mozilla Blog

State of Mozilla 2025

Doing for AI what we did for the web

State of Mozilla 2025

Doing for AI what we did for the web

What the Verdict Against Meta and Google Says About the Way We Live Now

Serving as a signal of a taste in the courts and among the public to have tech companies bear some of the costs of harm that they have allegedly caused, the recent verdict against Meta and Google in California says a lot about the central anxieties of our time.

EFF to State AGs: Investigate Google's Broken Promise to Users

Google's Failure to Warn Users About Law Enforcement Demands for Data Is Deceptive

Verdicts against Meta and Google may bring a new era of big tech accountability

Advocates hope recent verdicts against social media platforms will build momentum for bigger changes in Silicon Valley.

Announcing Supporters of Chromium-based Browsers

Since Google announced the Chromium project in 2008, we have been excited to build on the great foundations of open-source web browsers and contribute to the continued d…

A Former Google Engineer Built a Search Engine for Finding Every Privacy Violation You Face Online

Former Google engineer Tim Libert is releasing a search engine, webXray, that aims to find illicit online data collection and tracking—with the goal of becoming “the Henry Ford of tech lawsuits.”

Reclaim the internet: Mozilla’s rebrand for the next era of tech | The Mozilla Blog

Mozilla isn’t just another tech company — we’re a global crew of activists, technologists and builders, all working to keep the internet free, op

De-google-ify Internet - Main Page

The web giants centralize our digital lives in exchange for their services The Free Software community offers alternative ethical services The Framasoft network intends to prove itby hosting them

How One 1990s Browser Decision Created Big Tech’s Data Monopolies (And How We Might Finally Fix It) - Above the Law

From the take-back-control dept

About Human Rights at Google - Google

Learn more about Human Rights at Google

Garry Tan on Twitter / X

YC released an amicus brief re: US v Google yesterday. We love Google and what it represents as a paragon of US-led tech and innovation. We also want to make sure the excesses of big tech make way for tomorrow's little tech.— Garry Tan (@garrytan) May 10, 2025

Funding The Web: A Wise Choice

The Web is slow-motion collapsing for multiple reasons, but at the heart of it all is a little known system: the Search/Browser Levy. Let's fix it!

The Technical Feasibility of Divesting Google Chrome – Knight-Georgetown Institute

As the European Commission advances efforts under the Digital Markets Act to require Google to share its search data with competitors, lessons from historic antitrust remedies underscore how data access could be transformational in the AI-powered search market. While the Commission’s proposals represent a novel and comprehensive approach, key improvements to data scope and sharing frequency, privacy protections, and dispute resolution are needed. US courts and enforcers charged with implementing similar provisions should take note.

Google’s Chrome Antitrust Paradox

This Article examines Google’s dominance of the browser market, highlighting how Google’s Chrome browser plays a critical role in reinforcing Google’s dominance in other markets. While Google portrays Chrome as a neutral platform built on open-source technologies, this Article shows that Chrome is, in fact, instrumental in Google’s strategy to reinforce its dominance in the online advertising, publishing, and browser markets. The examination of Google’s strategic acquisitions, anticompetitive practices, and the implementation of so-called “privacy controls” underlines that Chrome is far from a neutral gateway to the web. Rather, it serves as a key tool for Google to maintain and extend its market power, often to the detriment of competition and innovation in the digital economy.This Article illustrates how Chrome not only bolsters Google’s position in online advertising and publishing through practices such as coercion and self-preferencing, but also leverages its advertising clout to engage in a “pay-to-play” paradigm—the cornerstone of Google’s larger strategy of market control. It also outlines potential regulatory interventions and remedies by drawing on historical antitrust precedents. Lastly, this Article proposes a triad of solutions motivated by an analysis of Google’s abuse of Chrome, including behavioral remedies targeting specific anticompetitive practices, structural remedies involving an internal separation of Google’s divisions, and divestiture of Chrome from Google into an independent organization.Despite Chrome’s dominance and its critical role in Google’s ecosystem, as well as its recent legal troubles with the Department of Justice, it so far has avoided significant antitrust action. A key reason for this inaction lies in the long-standing precedent supporting the hegemony of technology firms and the uncertainty surrounding Chrome’s viability as a standalone entity. This Article attempts to address these issues to enable antitrust actions that are essential in remedying current market imbalances. Such actions are also critical to mitigate future threats to competition from an increasingly monopolistic technology landscape, thereby fostering a competitive digital environment that promotes innovation and protects consumer interests.