Apple has entered the latest phase of the United States antitrust battle over Google’s search dominance, urging a federal appeals court to reject government efforts to stop the technology giant from paying companies to distribute its search engine.

In a friend-of-the-court brief filed with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Apple argued that prohibiting Google from making distribution payments would harm third-party businesses and consumers, while potentially allowing Google to benefit from continued access to default search positions without paying for them.

The company maintains that its agreement with Google supports the availability of what it considers the highest-quality search product for its users. Apple also argued that it has no plans to commit the substantial resources required to develop its own general search engine, making the existing commercial arrangement important to its business.

The intervention adds another dimension to a legal dispute that began in 2020, when the US Department of Justice and a coalition of states accused Google of using agreements with device manufacturers and browser operators to protect its position in online search.

In August 2024, US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google has unlawfully maintained monopolies in general search services and search text advertising. The court subsequently issued a remedies order in September 2025, requiring Google to make certain search data available to qualified competitors and provide search results and advertising syndication services to rivals.

However, the judge stopped short of prohibiting Google from paying companies such as Apple and Mozilla to distribute its search engine. The order also restricted exclusive distribution agreements involving Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant and Gemini for six years.

The Justice Department and several states are challenging the decision to allow the payments to continue. They argue that Google’s financial strength, built partly on its dominant position in search, lets it secure default search arrangements that make it hard for competitors to reach users and establish themselves in the market.

For Apple, however, the proposed payment ban raises a different commercial concern. The company argues that distributors should not be expected to provide Google with valuable access to their users without compensation. It also disputes the suggestion that ending the payments would encourage Apple to develop a competing search engine.

Google, which is separately appealing the monopoly finding, has also defended its distribution agreements. The company argues that browser operators independently selected Google because they believed it offered the best search experience for their users, describing the arrangements as lawful competition rather than exclusionary conduct.

For Apple, however, the proposed payment ban raises a different commercial concern. The company argues that distributors should not be expected to provide Google with valuable access to their users without compensation. It also disputes the suggestion that ending the payments would encourage Apple to develop a competing search engine.

Google, which is separately appealing the monopoly finding, has also defended its distribution agreements. The company argues that browser operators independently selected Google because they believed it offered the best search experience for their users, describing the arrangements as lawful competition rather than exclusionary conduct.  

The dispute highlights the commercial importance of digital distribution in the technology industry. Search competition is not determined by product quality alone; access to devices, browsers and default settings can influence which services consumers encounter first and use most frequently.

For advertisers and marketers, the implications extend beyond the legal arguments. Search engines remain important gateways to online audiences, shaping how businesses gain visibility, attract traffic and compete for consumer attention. Any changes to the arrangements governing search distribution could therefore influence the wider digital advertising ecosystem.

The appeals court is expected to hear arguments in January 2027, setting the stage for another significant development in the ongoing debate over competition, platform power and control of the digital marketplace.

ALSO WATCH: MARKETING EDGE ONTV