Judge Dismisses Publisher Antitrust Suits Over Google AI Overviews
AI-generated image · Bay Street Wire
A federal ruling rejects claims from Chegg and Penske Media, signaling that AI-driven traffic losses may not constitute illegal antitrust behavior.
US District Judge Amit Mehta has dismissed antitrust lawsuits filed by Chegg and Penske Media Corporation (PMC), the parent company of Rolling Stone, which alleged that Google's AI-powered search features illegally diverted web traffic from their sites.
According to reporting from The Verge and Ars Technica, the lawsuits filed in 2025 accused Google of abusing monopoly power by forcing publishers to provide content for AI Overviews for free or risk losing search visibility. Chegg specifically alleged that Google illegally scraped its educational content to allow Gemini models to recreate that material, while PMC argued it was unfair for content indexed for organic search to be harvested for AI answers without an opt-out mechanism.
Judge Mehta ruled that these claims do not meet the standards of antitrust law, stating that the publishers' "expectation" of receiving search traffic in exchange for free content does not constitute a legal agreement. While Mehta noted he is not "unsympathetic" to the plight of journalists, educators, and creators whose work is repurposed without compensation, he wrote that antitrust rules cannot replace legislative action to address the economic impacts of new innovation.
Despite the ruling, publishers continue to experience steep traffic declines due to Google's search overhaul. The Information reports that Google is currently running a pilot program paying approximately 100 publishers for contributions to Gemini, AI Mode, and AI Overviews, though Ars Technica reports this program is reportedly not well-received by publishers.