Glonce

Judge dismisses Chegg and Penske antitrust suits over Google AI Overviews

policyThe Glonce editorsThe Verge🔥65Glonce rating65Impact65Novelty50Relevance80Surprise50Players65Credibility90
Judge dismisses Chegg and Penske antitrust suits over Google AI Overviews

A federal judge has dismissed a pair of antitrust lawsuits against Google, one filed by the education company Chegg and one by Penske Media Corporation (PMC), the parent company of Rolling Stone. Both accused Google of driving web traffic away from their sites with its AI-powered search features. US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled for Google on a Wednesday, writing that PMC's and Chegg's claims do not stand up to antitrust law. Reuters reported the ruling first.

The suits were filed last year. In them, Chegg and PMC accused Google of abusing its monopoly power by coercing publishers into supplying content for AI Overviews for free, or risk disappearing from search results. The publishers alleged that Google's practices diverted traffic away from their sites and hurt their revenue.

Mehta, who made a landmark antitrust ruling against Google in 2024, did not accept that framing. He wrote: "Plaintiffs have pleaded only that they have an 'expectation' that Google will send them search traffic if they make their content available for free. But an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works."

He added that the court is not "unsympathetic to the situation publishers now find themselves in". But he wrote that antitrust rules cannot replace a legislative body's decision to address the economic impact of "new innovation."

The Verge, which carries the story, notes that publishers continue to feel the effects of Google's AI-powered search overhaul, with traffic to news outlets and small websites taking a steep dive. It also relays a report from The Information, published this week, that Google is paying around 100 publishers for their contributions to AI Overviews, AI Mode and Gemini as part of a pilot program. The Verge discloses that it is part of Penske Media.

Key facts

  • US District Judge Amit Mehta dismissed two antitrust lawsuits against Google, one by Chegg and one by Rolling Stone parent Penske Media Corporation.
  • The plaintiffs said Google coerced publishers into supplying content for AI Overviews for free, or risk disappearing from search results, and that this diverted traffic and hurt revenue.
  • Mehta wrote that the plaintiffs pleaded only an 'expectation' of search traffic, and that "an expectation is not an agreement."
  • He wrote that antitrust rules cannot replace a legislative body's decision to address the economic impact of "new innovation."
  • The Information reported this week that Google is paying around 100 publishers for contributions to AI Overviews, AI Mode and Gemini in a pilot program.

Why it matters

The two suits were a test of whether antitrust law could be used against Google's AI-powered search features. Mehta's answer, as reported, is that it cannot on these facts: the plaintiffs showed an expectation of traffic, not an agreement, and that expectation is simply how a general search engine works. His remark that antitrust rules cannot replace a legislative body's decision on the economic impact of "new innovation" points the dispute toward lawmakers rather than courts. Mehta is also the judge who made the landmark 2024 antitrust ruling against Google, so a loss for publishers before him carries weight.

Who it affects

Most directly Chegg and Penske Media Corporation, whose claims were dismissed. More broadly it touches publishers, news outlets and small websites, which the source describes as seeing traffic take a steep dive amid Google's AI-powered search overhaul. Google gains a ruling that its AI search features do not break antitrust law as pleaded in these two cases.

How to use it

There is nothing to adopt here; this is a court ruling, not a product. For publishers and anyone tracking AI and search policy, the useful part is the reasoning: a claim built on an expected flow of search traffic did not survive, according to the judge, because no agreement was pleaded. Separately, the reported pilot program in which Google pays around 100 publishers for contributions to AI Overviews, AI Mode and Gemini is a development to watch, though the source gives no terms.

How solid is it

The ruling and the judge's quotes come from The Verge's report, which itself credits Reuters for the earlier coverage. The quotes are given as Mehta's own words. The Verge discloses that it is part of Penske Media, the parent company of one of the plaintiffs. The pilot-payment detail is secondhand, relayed from The Information. The source does not say whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice, or whether the plaintiffs can amend or appeal.

Risks and caveats

The source does not say whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice, or whether the plaintiffs can amend or appeal, so it should not be read as the final word. It gives no figures for the traffic or revenue losses Chegg or PMC claimed, and no statement from Google, Chegg or PMC is quoted. The terms of the reported Google pilot payment program, including amounts and which publishers, are not given, and the source does not connect those payments to the lawsuits. No calendar date for the ruling is given, only Wednesday.

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

— US District Judge Amit Mehta, in his ruling