Judge dismisses Google AI search lawsuits

US District Judge Amit Mehta has dismissed antitrust lawsuits filed by Chegg and Penske Media against Google over AI search practices that reduced publisher traffic.

Chegg and Penske's claims

Chegg alleged Google illegally scraped its educational content for Gemini models. Penske, which owns Rolling Stone and Variety, claimed it was unfair that sites indexed for organic search also had content harvested for AI answers with no opt-out.

Judge finds no legal violation

Mehta ruled that Google's implicit agreement with websites is not legally relevant. An expectation of search traffic is not an agreement, and antitrust law does not apply without a formal arrangement.

“An expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works.”

Judge acknowledges publisher harm

While dismissing the case, Mehta wrote that he is not unsympathetic to publishers' situation and recognizes Google's approach may be unfair, even if not illegal under current law.

“The court does not treat Plaintiffs' alleged harms lightly. Nor is it unsympathetic to the situation publishers now find themselves in.”

Antitrust law cannot replace legislation

Mehta stated that antitrust laws cannot be applied in place of legislative action just because something feels unfair. The court is bound to apply the law as written, not as it ought to be.

“The court is bound to apply the law only as it is written, not how the court or any party believes it ought to be.”

Publishers may find better luck overseas

Google faces an uphill battle in US courts without new legislation. The European Commission is considering AI search questions and takes a dimmer view of Big Tech. The UK has ordered Google to provide an AI opt-out for sites in organic search results.