In a significant setback for publishers concerned about AI search's impact on web traffic, a US federal judge has dismissed antitrust lawsuits filed by Chegg and Penske Media against Google.
The companies had accused Google of antitrust violations through products like AI Overviews, which they argued led to decreasing traffic at numerous websites. However, US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google's conduct is not illegal under antitrust law.
Chegg, an education platform, claimed Google illegally scraped its educational content to train Gemini models, essentially recreating that content and reducing the site's traffic. Penske, which owns publications like Rolling Stone and Variety, filed a similar case alleging lost traffic and arguing it was unfair that sites indexed for organic search would also have their content harvested for AI answers with no way to opt out.
These arguments did not sway the judge. "Plaintiffs have pleaded only that they have an 'expectation' that Google will send them search traffic if they make their content available for free," wrote Mehta. "But an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works."
Since Google never had a formal arrangement with either company, antitrust law doesn't apply. Mehta, who also heard the DOJ's long-running search antitrust case against Google, acknowledged that Google's approach may be unfair to publishers even if it's not illegal.
