Apple was criticized for being slow to honor a $2 billion plus deal with Google.

Last summer, a US judge ruled that Google had to pay Apple over $2 billion in order for its device to function as the default search engine. This was deemed illegal.

Multiple Apple CEOs testified in the case, but the judge denied additional witness testimony from three more people and said, "Apple was too slow..."

"The Story So Far"

"When entering a query into the unified Safari browser to perform a web search, that search is (unless manually changed) performed by Google. This is because it gives Google the right to pay Apple tens of billions of dollars annually."

This is great for Google. They can get a lot of search traffic from Apple users and therefore have the ability to place ads in front of them. The fact that they have high average income also makes Apple customers particularly valuable demographic for advertisers.

It's also good for Apple. This allows them to receive free money. There is a need to set defaults, and since Google is the most well-known search engine, it is likely that they will follow it.

The exact amount has not been disclosed, but Apple is hiding some of this revenue as part of their service income. It initially rose from several billion dollars to low single-digit figures, and now stands at over $2 billion.

I think these estimates are quite accurate. This is because the antitrust lawsuit against Google led to the unintentional disclosure of the 2022 amount (in reality $2 billion). This was indeed true.

Google was ruled to be violating antitrust law by accepting payments from Apple, and it was proposed that their behavior must cease for the next ten years. This will have a significant impact on Apple's service income.

"The remainder of this is an issue of whether the proposed remedial language will ultimately be adopted or modified."

"Alibaba wants to add more evidence, but the court did not allow it"

Before Christmas, on December 23rd, Apple submitted three additional witnesses at the last minute and sought help to defend its position. However, accepting a payment from Apple does not necessarily mean that they have committed any crime. However, there is a clear economic interest in the outcome.

However, according to Courthouse News Service, the court denied this request and told the company it was "too slow," saying it would add unnecessary delay to the case.

The US district judge Amit Mehta said that Alibaba's filing was too late for his judgment, so it must be withdrawn.

"I believed that Alibaba (or should have) knew that waiting two and a half months for an eight-month-long process would constitute a major delay." Mehta referred to the medical relief decision he expects in August 2025.

Mehta mentioned potential delays due to additional evidence; the possibility of additional delays resulting from Apple presenting evidence without limiting it to specific issues; and the potential for a floodgate-like spread of similar requests from other companies like Sony and Attentive.

The judge did, however, allow Apple to submit a friend's status report. This will be considered when making the final decision. A friend's status report is a paper submitted by someone not involved in the lawsuit that provides beneficial context or advice to the court.

Photo by Firmbee.com / Unsplas