A federal court will soon determine whether Google can access sensitive business information from its competitors as part of ongoing antitrust remedy proceedings following the company’s search monopoly ruling.
The Justice Department filed a request on Friday asking U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta to prevent Google from viewing confidential data submitted by rival search companies to a Technical Committee overseeing the remedy process. The committee was established to manage Google’s mandated sharing of search index and user data with competitors.
In September 2025, Judge Mehta ordered Google to share its search index and user data with competing search engines and certain search syndication services. The three-member Technical Committee was tasked with overseeing this data-sharing arrangement while ensuring the protection of sensitive information and screening potential recipients to prevent data leaks.
The dispute centers on how much access Google should have to information that competitors submit to the committee. The Justice Department argues that allowing Google to view this information could discourage competitors from participating in the remedy process altogether.
According to the government’s filing, Google’s access to competitor information would undermine efforts to address what they describe as more than a decade of competitive harm caused by the company’s internet search monopoly. They propose that Google and its legal team should only be able to access confidential third-party information contained in the Technical Committee’s final written recommendations, with limited opportunities to request specific information subject to government approval.
Steve Fischer, chief business officer at DuckDuckGo, submitted a declaration supporting the Justice Department’s position. Fischer expressed particular concern about protecting forward-looking business plans from Google’s view. He stated that these documents represent some of DuckDuckGo’s most competitively sensitive materials and that disclosure to Google executives could have catastrophic impacts on the company’s ability to execute new product plans.
Fischer noted that while DuckDuckGo had previously been required to produce sensitive documents during litigation, most of those materials were at least a year old at the time of production. Forward-looking plans, he emphasized, carry an even higher level of sensitivity given their strategic importance.
Google maintains that it needs to be an active participant in the Technical Committee proceedings and requires insight into competitor submissions to properly defend its interests. The company argues that the Justice Department’s proposal would deny it due process by blocking access to key evidence underlying the committee’s decisions and recommendations.
In its filing, Google stated that it cannot meaningfully address the Technical Committee’s recommendations or raise necessary objections without access to the information the committee considers during its deliberations. The company contends that receiving only the final recommendations, with limited disclosed information, is insufficient given the potential impact on its core business operations.
Google also raised concerns that under the Justice Department’s proposal, the government could present the committee’s recommendations as being backed by substantial third-party feedback without providing any supporting evidence for Google to review or challenge.
Judge Mehta has scheduled a hearing for Tuesday to hear arguments from both sides on this issue. The dispute occurs as Google has appealed Mehta’s monopoly rulings to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, with a briefing schedule extending through late September and oral arguments expected this winter.
The outcome of this procedural dispute could significantly impact how the remedy process unfolds and whether smaller search companies will feel comfortable participating in efforts to increase competition in the search engine market.
Leave a Reply