Google today appealed a 2024 ruling that found it violated antitrust law by paying to be the default search engine on iPhones. In a filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Google said the district court made an error when concluding that Google's search success was due to anything other than competition on merit.

Google suggested it surpassed competition through better innovation, more investments, and "just working harder," which is why Apple chose Google Search as its default search option on Apple devices.

Whether or not Google has monopoly power, Google did nothing that "harm[ed] the competitive process." It did not impede its rivals' opportunity to make—or Apple's and Mozilla's ability to choose—a better offer. Indeed, there is no finding—or even any evidence—that Google's customers would have chosen a rival, even in the absence of the challenged agreements. Google just prevailed in the marketplace fair and square.

The filing points out that Apple was free to distribute and promote rival search engines, with Google highlighting the alternative browser options that Apple offers in the Safari settings. Google suggests that any "exclusivity" interpreted by the district court was Apple's choice for "sound business reasons."

Google is asking the appeals court to undo the remedies that were put in place to address its search monopoly. Google was told to share search data, offer information on user interaction, and syndicate its results to competing companies, which it will need to start doing barring a successful appeal.

While Google is aiming for the entire ruling to be thrown out, Google also wants generative AI companies like OpenAI excluded from receiving data. Google says AI products "did not even exist" during the period covered in the DoJ's filing, so it makes no sense for them to receive search data. Google further said that AI companies are "already succeeding as wildly as any technology in human history without any need to free-ride on Google's success."

Google pays Apple billions of dollars each year to be the default Safari search engine, and the deal was a major component in the antitrust lawsuit that the U.S. Department of Justice brought against Google. Apple and Google's search engine deal could have been addressed in the remedies applied to Google, but the court did not prevent Google from making search agreements.

While Google is barred from entering into exclusive contracts for search engine distribution, it is still allowed to pay Apple to be a search engine option on iPhone. The DoJ also wanted Google to be forced to sell its Chrome browser and possibly offload the Android operating system, but neither of those consequences were implemented.

The remedies in the DoJ vs. Google case went into effect on February 3, but Google hasn't been required to provide data yet because implementation details have not been worked out. The five-member Technical Committee set up by the judge overseeing the case has not outlined license terms or privacy safeguards, nor has criteria for which companies qualify as competitors been established.

Oral arguments for Google's appeal haven't been scheduled, so we're unlikely to hear more on the issue until late 2026 or early 2027.