Judge says Apple left it too late to defend its $20B+ deal with Google

A federal judge last summer ruled that the $20B+ Google pays to Apple to be the default search engine on the Cupertino company’s devices was illegal.

Several Apple execs testified in the case, but a request to present an additional three witnesses has been refused by the judge, saying Apple left it too late …

The story so far

If you carry out a web search by typing your query into the integrated Safari bar, that search will (unless you manually changed the default) be carried out on Google. That’s because Google pays Apple a multi-billion dollar sum each year for the privilege. 

That’s a great deal for Google, because it gets a huge amount of its search traffic from Apple users, and thus the ability to place ads in front of them. Apple customers are also a particularly valuable demographic for advertisers, thanks to the fact that they have higher than average incomes.

It’s also a great deal for Apple because it’s free money. They have to set a default, and Google is the best-known search engine, so they’d probably do it anyway.

The exact amount has never been revealed, and Apple hides it inside its Services revenue, but it was estimated to have climbed from the low single-digit billions at the outset to over $20B today.

Those estimates appear to have been pretty accurate, because the antitrust case against Google resulted in the accidental disclosure of the 2022 figure, which was indeed $20B.

A judge found that Google was indeed breaking antitrust law by making the payment to Apple, and proposed that it must cease doing so for the next 10 years. That would mean a big hit to Apple’s Services revenue.

The remainder of the case is about whether the proposed remedy will be finalized or modified.

Apple wanted to add witnesses, judge refused

Just before Christmas, on December 23, Apple filed a last-minute request to present three additional witnesses, to help defend its own position. (To be clear, Apple is not accused of any wrong-doing by accepting the payment, but has an obvious financial interest in the outcome.)

However, the Courthouse News Service reports that the judge has declined this request, telling the company it waited far too late to make it, as it would now add an unacceptable delay to the case.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta explained in his ruling that Apple’s motion was untimely and thus he must deny the motion to intervene […]

“Apple knew (or should have known) that waiting two-and-a-half months to intervene in a proceeding scheduled to last just eight months altogether would constitute a significant delay,” Mehta said, referencing his expected remedy decision in August 2025. 

Mehta said that there would be the direct delay caused by additional testimony; likely additional delays caused by Apple not limiting its testimony to the specific issues raised; and by opening the floodgates to similar requests from other companies like Samsung and AT&T, with whom Google has similar arrangements.

The judge will, however, allow Apple to submit an amicus brief, which he will consider in reaching his final ruling. An amicus brief – literally a contribution from “a friend of the court” – is a paper submitted by someone who is not a party to a trial but who believes they can provide context or advice that might prove helpful to the judge.

Photo by Firmbee.com on Unsplash