[allcentury]

> Plaintiffs proposed a remedial term unique to Apple that would forbid any “contract between Google and Apple in which there would be anything exchanged of value.”

Wow

[CobrastanJorji]

Ooof. Google gives Apple like a third of its search revenue on iOS searches. Apple gets tens of billions of bucks from this. Presumably it is so much money in part because Microsoft would happily pay half that to be the default instead. But if Google isn't allowed to offer anything at all, Microsoft is free to offer only a sliver of what it otherwise would have, because what's Apple gonna do otherwise, send all of its users to Duck Duck Go?

[mcintyre1994]

I suspect the biggest concern Apple has is that it’s a big part of their services revenue, which is what’s holding their earnings up currently. They want Services to be seen as a big interesting business, but it’s mostly Google and App Store games. It’d be a big problem for them to report a drop in services revenue, and they’re not going to find anything to replace it quickly enough.

[adam_arthur]

I seriously doubt Apple would move to Bing by default, even if there were some short term monetary gain. Using a subpar/cluttered search interface is so far off from their brand image.

I find it 10x more likely Apple would suddenly find the motivation to make their own search engine if forced to end their deal with Google.

(They say they wouldn't under any circumstance, but seems to be posturing to me)

Regardless, it's clear getting paid Billions to give people the default they'd choose anyway is a good deal for them.

I wonder who at Google negotiated this, because the terms seem very bad for them. They only make sense if the premise was to prevent Apple from starting a competitor

[computerfriend]

> what's Apple gonna do otherwise, send all of its users to Duck Duck Go?

Now that they're not encumbered by the Google deal: build their own search engine.

[reginald78]

Apple is one of the most valuable companies in the world. They'd probably just buy an also ran search engine and make it the default. I'd say the only reason they didn't do this already was Google's money bag was so big and replacing them would be so easy if it shrank or disappeared.

Smaller companies are the ones that will really get screwed by this ruling, Apple will be fine.

[chrisco255]

Or just don't use a default at all and have users select a search provider when they get their phones. Would mean they don't get any kickbacks though. They could also, and probably should, route most requests through Siri first, that is, when they finally get Siri up to the level of modern LLMs.

[claytongulick]

Or Kagi :D

[jayd16]

> Microsoft is free to offer only a sliver of what it otherwise would have

Would Apple even be able to make a deal with anyone at that point?

[ahoka]

Of course they would make a half assed Siri Search. Oh wait, that might work.

[ClumsyPilot]

> what's Apple gonna do otherwise, send all of its users to Duck Duck Go?

I mean, ye

[mimsee]

So all Google services would disappear from the App Store because it could be argued that it provides tremendous value for Google to have their services there? The $100 USD /year fee, even if withdrawn, would trigger it, since it's a contract, right?

[frereubu]

As far as I understand it, this is specifically to do with the bundling of Google search in Apple devices. Still big but not a ban on any contracts between them.

[btown]

From https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/UNITEDS... the proposed restriction seems to be:

> “Google must not offer or provide anything of value to Apple—or offer any commercial terms—that in any way creates an economic disincentive to compete in or enter the GSE or Search Text Ad markets,”

That's a very broad statement that could easily be interpreted to cover more than just the default-search-provider agreement.

[tivert]

>> Plaintiffs proposed a remedial term unique to Apple that would forbid any “contract between Google and Apple in which there would be anything exchanged of value.”

> Wow

That seems a little broad. Wouldn't it forbid Google from buying Macbooks for employees, for instance?

[CDRdude]

There’s a joke in there about the value of Macbooks.

[chrisco255]

No, because there's no contract necessary to purchase Macbooks.

[brookst]

Yeah that seems a little extreme. Like some person at Apple signs up for Google Workspaces and the company's in violation.

[duskwuff]

Or, for that matter - Apple is a major customer of GCP for iCloud storage. A court order requiring that business to cease would place an undue burden on Apple.

[SAI_Peregrinus]

Or Google wants to buy/license any Apple products, e.g. for developing apps to run on Apple devices.