Antitrust lawsuits targeting Google AI search dismissed by federal judge
A federal judge dismissed Chegg and Penske antitrust suits over Google AI Overviews cutting publisher traffic.
US District Judge Amit Mehta dismissed 2025 antitrust lawsuits by Chegg and Penske Media accusing Google of illegally using publisher content in AI Overviews and Gemini. Chegg alleged Google scraped educational material so Gemini could recreate it and cut traffic; Penske, owner of Rolling Stone and Variety, said indexed sites cannot opt out of AI-answer harvesting. Mehta held that an expectation of free search traffic is not a legal agreement, so antitrust law does not apply. He previously found Google liable in the DOJ search case but declined the harshest remedies.
- Judge Amit Mehta dismissed Chegg and Penske Media antitrust suits against Google.
- Plaintiffs said AI Overviews harvest indexed content and reduce publisher traffic.
- Mehta ruled an expectation of search traffic is not a legal agreement.
- He previously found Google liable in the DOJ search antitrust case.
Full article276 words · extracted from arstechnica.com · click to collapse
In a setback for publishers worried about the effects of AI search, a US federal judge has dismissed lawsuits filed by Chegg and Penske Media against Google. The companies accused Google of antitrust violations in products like AI overviews, which have led to decreasing traffic at numerous sites. However, US District Judge Amit Mehta has ruled that Google’s conduct is not illegal under antitrust law.
The lawsuits were filed in 2025, and Google requested a dismissal earlier this year. Chegg, an education and learning platform, claimed in its lawsuit that Google illegally scraped its educational content. This allowed Gemini models to essentially recreate that content and reduce the site’s traffic. Penske, which owns publications like Rolling Stone and Variety, filed a similar case that alleged lost traffic. Specifically, the publisher claimed it was unfair that sites indexed for organic search would also have their content harvested for AI answers, with no way to opt out.
These arguments did not sway the judge, who noted that Google’s implicit agreement with websites is not legally relevant. “Plaintiffs have pleaded only that they have an ‘expectation’ that Google will send them search traffic if they make their content available for free,” wrote Mehta. “But an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works.”
Since Google never had a formal arrangement with either Chegg or Penske, antitrust law doesn’t apply. And Mehta is aware of the legal issues surrounding search. He also heard the DOJ’s long-running search antitrust case against Google, eventually finding that Google violated the law. However, the government didn’t get the harsh penalties it wanted in that case.
Text extracted automatically; images, tables and formatting may be missing. Original: https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/10/antitrust-lawsuits-targeting-google-ai-search-dismissed-by-federal-judge/