Apple has urged a US federal appeals court to reject a government effort to stop Google from paying companies to distribute its search engine, arguing that a ban could hurt businesses and consumers while leaving Google with access to valuable default search positions.
The company made its case in a friend of the court brief filed with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, as the dispute over Google’s dominance in online search moves into another stage.
Apple’s intervention places the commercial interests of device makers and browser operators at the centre of the case, with the company arguing that firms should be compensated for giving Google access to their users. Brandspur Brand News reports that Apple also maintains it has no plans to invest the substantial resources required to build its own general search engine.
The antitrust case began in 2020, when the US Department of Justice and a coalition of states accused Google of using agreements with device manufacturers and browser operators to protect its position in the search market.
In August 2024, US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google had unlawfully maintained monopolies in general search services and search text advertising. A remedies order issued in September 2025 required Google to make certain search data available to qualified competitors and provide search results and advertising syndication services to rivals.
The judge, however, did not prohibit Google from paying companies such as Apple and Mozilla to distribute its search engine. The order also restricted exclusive distribution agreements involving Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant and Gemini for six years.
The Justice Department and several states are challenging the decision to allow the payments to continue. They contend that Google’s financial strength and dominant position make it difficult for rival search services to secure default placements and reach users.
See Also: Tim Cook Set To Step Down As Apple CEO After 15 Years, John Ternus Named Successor
Apple disputes the argument that ending the payments would encourage it to develop a competing search engine. It says the existing arrangement supports access to what it regards as a high-quality search product, while a payment ban could allow Google to retain prominent distribution without compensating the companies providing it.
Google is separately appealing the finding that it unlawfully maintained a monopoly. It has defended its distribution agreements, arguing that browser operators chose its search engine independently because they considered it the best option for their users.
The case has implications beyond the companies involved. Search engines are key routes through which consumers discover information and businesses attract online audiences. Default settings on devices and browsers can influence which services users encounter, making distribution agreements commercially important to search providers and advertisers alike.
For businesses seeking visibility online, changes to how search engines are distributed could affect the competitive landscape. However, the eventual impact will depend on the outcome of the legal challenge and any changes to the arrangements governing search access.
The appeals court is expected to hear arguments in January 2027, marking another significant stage in the US dispute over competition and control of the digital marketplace.
