**DOJ Proposes Radical Remedies to Curb Google's Dominance**

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has unveiled its initial recommendations aimed at curbing Google's monopolistic control over the search engine market. These measures come after a court victory declaring Google's search operations as an unlawful monopoly. Central to DOJ's strategy are both behavioral and structural remedies, which range from altering business practices to potentially breaking up the tech giant.

One of the DOJ's primary concerns is futureproofing the search industry, particularly with the advent of generative AI, which is poised to become an integral part of the evolving market. The government aims to prevent Google from leveraging its current dominance to stifle competition as technology advances. Judge Amit Mehta has been presented with four key areas where Google's power can be constrained, which include limiting the types of contracts Google can negotiate and enforcing nondiscrimination and interoperability rules.

Google's extensive pre-installation contracts with phone manufacturers and web browsers are a focal point for the DOJ. These agreements often make Google Search the default option, which the DOJ argues limits consumer choice and reduces incentives for commercial partners to switch to competitors. Observing these practices, the DOJ suggests "undoing" Google's current market impact as a necessary first step toward addressing its unlawful conduct.

Aside from contractual agreements, Google promotes its search engine and artificial intelligence products through other platforms like Chrome, Android, and the Play Store. The DOJ posits that these practices restrict avenues for rival companies to compete. Though specific remedies were not detailed, both behavioral adjustments and potential structural changes, such as a breakup, are under consideration.

To further diversify consumer options, a coalition of states involved in a related lawsuit proposes initiatives to educate users about alternative search engines. This measure seeks to dismantle the self-reinforcing cycle of dominance that Google enjoys, wherein the search engine's large query volume enhances its algorithmic superiority, thereby attracting even more users.

Moreover, the DOJ is contemplating measures to offset Google's advantage by possibly requiring the company to share key data and tools with competitors. This could cover AI-assisted search features, data indexes, and ranking signals.

The DOJ is also mindful of privacy concerns related to data sharing, emphasizing the need to distinguish between legitimate privacy issues and pretextual arguments used to maintain market dominance. There's a focus on preventing Google from exploiting data it collects in ways that can't be replicated by competitors, under the guise of user privacy.

As generative AI continues to shape the future of search, concerns arise regarding how Google amasses data from websites with little bargaining power. The DOJ is deliberating rules that would allow websites to opt into Google's search results while opting out of their data being used to train AI models.

Separately, Judge Mehta recognized Google's monopoly over general search text ads, a segment distinct from another DOJ case dealing with ad-serving tools. Google's ability to disregard competitors' pricing in this market is cited as monopolistic behavior. To address this, the DOJ is considering remedies to foster competition, potentially by decoupling Google's ad feed from its search results and enforcing transparency in ad performance metrics provided to advertisers.

Overall, these proposed measures reflect the DOJ's commitment to dismantling Google's monopolistic practices while ensuring the search industry remains competitive as it evolves technologically.