Google's legal folder makes an odd suggestion about the iPhone and iPad

The iPhone and iPad could have different default search engines, according to a Google legal statement as the company tries to protect its annual $2 billion deal with Apple.

The annual payment of Google to Apple for Safari to use the default search engine seems certain to be banned in a competition case, but the search giant is countering with several alternative proposals.

The Annual Payment of Google to Apple of Around $2 Billion

If you perform a web search by typing your query into the integrated Safari bar, this search will (unless you have manually changed the default setting) be conducted on Google. This is because Google pays Apple each year a billion dollars for the authorization.

This is an excellent deal for Google, as it receives a significant amount of search traffic from Apple users and thus the right to place ads in front of them. Apple customers are also a particularly valuable demographic group for advertisers, thanks to their higher incomes compared to averages.

This is also good news for Apple because it's free money. The company must choose a default search engine, and Google is the most well-known search engine, so the company would probably do this anyway.

The exact amount has never been revealed, and Apple hides it in its service revenues, but a competition case against Google accidentally revealed the 2022 figure, which was $2 billion.

The Department of Justice supported that this payment was illegal because it gave an unfair advantage to Google compared to smaller search engines, and a court granted this last summer. The DOJ asked the judge to ban this payment for a period of 10 years.

Google Proposes an Alternative Concerning Default Search Engines

In accordance with legal procedures, Google is authorized to make a counter-proposal to the DOJ, and it has done so now.

Google accepts that its agreement with Apple will be banned, but argues that it should be for three years rather than ten. It says that the technology industry is rapidly evolving, especially thanks to the emergence of generative artificial intelligence as a new form of search, so the fact that the company dominates the industry today does not mean it will continue to do so.

The iPhone and iPad could have different default search engines.

The company also suggests that more flexibility would better encourage other search services to compete with Google in Apple's business. In a particularly strange suggestion, it supports that the iPhone and iPad could have different default search engines, suggesting thus that Google would be able to bid for one while competitors bid for the other.

Our proposal allows browsers to continue offering Google Search to their users and earn revenue from this partnership. However, it also offers additional flexibility: it would allow concluding several default agreements on different platforms (for example, a different search engine for iPhones and iPads) and in navigation modes, as well as the possibility of changing the default search engine annually.

While Google currently dominates the search industry, the company has a strong argument that its dominance should not last forever. We have already seen people using artificial intelligence services like ChatGPT to replace conventional search engines, and it is indeed difficult to predict what will happen in the future.

Before the launch of the iPhone, for example, Nokia essentially dominated the smartphone industry. It seemed inconceivable that it could ever leave this market, but just seven years later, the company was effectively out of the smartphone market. While Google seems secure today, its future dominance is certainly not certain.

Theoretically, by making default search offers more granular, this would make it more realistic for competing search engines to offer a share of the pie. However, Apple is fully committed to providing a consistent experience on devices, so the idea that it signs agreements to provide different search engines on the iPhone and iPad is, honestly, foolish.

There may be some room for compromise in the court's judgment, and Google might well succeed in reducing the ban from 10 years, but certainly over the next few years, Apple will lose $2 billion annually.

Photo by Brandon Romanchuk on Unsplas