THE REMEDIES

The Final Judgment establishes a set of remedies intended to restore competition in the general search market and search text ads market. These remedies include terms under which data and syndication services are made available to “Qualified Competitors”: companies that meet certain criteria described in the following section. This page describes only those provisions. The Final Judgment contains other provisions not described here. The Final Judgment itself is the controlling document.

1. Web Search Index Data

Google shall make available to Qualified Competitors, at marginal cost, data related to Google's Web Search Index within thirty days of a Qualified Competitor's certification, unless granted additional time. The data includes document identifiers, URL mappings, and metadata for all websites in the full Web Search Index Google uses for searches on Google.com, the Google Search Application, or any future Google general search products.

2. User-Side Data

For the term of the Final Judgment, Google shall make available to Qualified Competitors, at marginal cost, certain User-side Data on a non-discriminatory basis while safeguarding personal privacy and security. Google shall make this data available to Qualified Competitors at least twice, with the exact number and frequency to be determined by the Court after consultation with Plaintiffs and the Technical Committee.

3. Search Syndication

Google shall make available to any Qualified Competitor, on financial terms no worse than those offered to any other user of Google's search syndication products, a syndication license whose term will be five years from the date the license is signed. Under the license, Google is required, via real-time API(s), to make available ranked organic web search results, query-rewriting features, and certain Search Feature content in response to each query submitted by a Qualified Competitor.

Qualified Competitors' use of Google's syndication services in the first year will be capped at 40% of Qualified Competitors' annual U.S. queries and decline over the course of a five-year period, with an expectation that Qualified Competitors will become independent of Google over time through investment in their own search capabilities. The pace of this tapering will be determined by the Court upon consultation with Plaintiffs and the Technical Committee.

Sub-syndication of search results is not permitted under the Final Judgment.

4. Search Text Ads Syndication

Google shall make available to any Qualified Competitor a Search Text Ads Syndication License whose term will be five years from the date the license is signed, on financial terms no worse than those offered to any other user of Google's Search Text Ads syndication products. Qualified Competitors may elect, in their sole discretion, the queries for which they will request syndicated ad results.

5. Sub-Syndication of Search Text Ads

Queries from a syndicator of the Qualified Competitor are eligible for sub-syndication under the Final Judgment if such Qualified Competitor has been certified as a Competitor to a Google ads platform (e.g., Google Ads).

The certification criteria and application process are currently being developed by the Technical Committee in consultation with Plaintiffs. Additional details will be published as they are finalized and approved.

Who Is a "Competitor"?

The Final Judgment defines a "Competitor" as any provider of or potential entrant in the provision of (i) a General Search Engine (GSE) in the United States, (ii) Search Text Ads in the United States, or (iii) a GenAI Product in the United States.

The Final Judgment defines these products as follows:

• General Search Engine (GSE): Software or a service that produces links to websites and other relevant information in response to a user query or prompt and that seeks to fulfill a broad array of informational needs.
• Search Text Ad: A general search text advertisement, which is an ad that resembles an organic link on a SERP. Search Text Ads can include images and often appear at the top of the SERP with a designation indicating that they are paid advertisements. "Search Text Ad" also includes Search Text Ads appearing in or in connection with Google AI Overviews.
• GenAI Product: Any application, software, service, feature, tool, functionality, or product that involves or makes use of Generative AI capabilities or models and has among its principal functions answering information-seeking prompts across a wide variety of topics using a broad range of publicly available information.

What Is a "Qualified Competitor"? The Final Judgment defines a "Qualified Competitor" as a Competitor who:

1. Meets the Plaintiffs' approved data security standards as recommended by the Technical Committee;
2. Agrees to regular data security and privacy audits by the Technical Committee;
3. Makes a sufficient showing to the Plaintiffs, in consultation with the Technical Committee, of a plan to invest and compete in or with the GSE and/or Search Text Ads markets; and
4. Does not pose a risk to the national security of the United States.

The Technical Committee ("TC") is the five-person committee of experts appointed by the Court to assist in enforcement of and compliance with the Final Judgment in United States v. Google LLC, No. 1:20-cv-03010 (D.D.C.). The TC operates through Remedies Technical Committee, Inc. ("RTC").

Expertise. TC members are experts in some combination of software engineering, information retrieval, artificial intelligence, economics, behavioral science, and data privacy and data security.

Role. The TC serves as the independent technical body that advises Plaintiffs across all aspects of the implementation of the Final Judgment's remedies. This includes monitoring Google's compliance, recommending data security standards applicable to Qualified Competitors, consulting with Plaintiffs on remedial license terms, privacy safeguards, and Qualified Competitor certification, and communicating with third parties about how their inquiries might be resolved.

Technical Committee Members. The appointees are listed below.

Tammy Savage
Technical Committee Chairperson and Standing Technical Committee Member
Nominated by U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division
Appointed by HON. AMIT P. MEHTA

Gerry Campbell
Standing Technical Committee Member
Nominated by State of Colorado, et al.
Appointed by HON. AMIT P. MEHTA

John Abowd
Standing Technical Committee Member
Nominated by Google LLC
Appointed by HON. AMIT P. MEHTA

Dirk Bergemann
Technical Committee Member
Nominated by Standing Technical Committee Members
Appointed by HON. AMIT P. MEHTA

CJ Saretto
Technical Committee Member
Nominated by Standing Technical Committee Members
Appointed by HON. AMIT P. MEHTA

Historical information and the most recent news will be shared here.

Historical information
Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice
U.S. and Plaintiff States v. Google LLC [2020]
https://www.justice.gov/atr/case/us-and-plaintiff-states-v-google-llc

October 13, 2026
Plaintiffs' Joint Recommendation for Template Search and Search Text Ads Syndication Agreement
Redacted-Public Version, Google’s objections, Supplemental Joint Recommendation, and Appendix A

December 5, 2025
Final Judgment and Memorandum Opinion

For general inquiries regarding the Technical Committee, please use the form below.

This form is for general inquiries only. This is not a mechanism for submitting an application to become a Qualified Competitor or complaints regarding Google's compliance with the Final Judgment.

We will respond to inquiries as promptly as practicable.