Eddy Cue fights to protect the $20 billion that Apple receives from Google.

Eddy Cue, Apple’s senior vice president of services, has expressed that alternatives such as Microsoft’s Bing or DuckDuckGo are unlikely to challenge Google’s dominance in the search arena. However, AI-powered services have the potential to disrupt this monopoly. Cue made these statements while returning to a courtroom in Washington, DC, where he previously testified in the Justice Department’s trial against Google’s search monopoly in September 2023. In the current phase of the remedies trial, Cue noted that generative AI startups have made significant progress in a short amount of time that could destabilize Google’s hegemony, possibly more effectively than court decisions.

The testimony also focused on defending a critical source of Apple’s revenue: the payments it receives from Google for being the default search engine in the Safari browser. After the 2023 trial, Judge Amit Mehta concluded that Google had illegally monopolized the online search market, partly through agreements like the one with Safari. In recent weeks, both Google and the Justice Department have presented their positions on potential solutions to the issue. The prosecution argues that Google should share valuable search data with its competitors and divest its Chrome browser. On the other hand, Google, which intends to appeal the previous decision, seeks only restrictions on the agreements that Mehta has deemed unjustifiably exclusionary.

Cue argued that rapid advancements in AI are diminishing the antitrust threat identified by Mehta. For the first time in 22 years, Apple experienced a decline in search volume in Safari last month, a side effect of the increased use of AI chatbots. However, the Justice Department disagrees, pointing out that technological development is not progressing quickly enough to resolve a persistent market problem.

Apple has a lot at stake, having previously revealed that the company makes $20 billion annually from Google. The solutions proposed by Google could reduce those revenues, although they would also allow Apple to explore new options and maintain much of its revenue stream. In contrast, the Justice Department's proposals could eliminate that stream entirely. Cue expressed his astonishment at the possibility of Apple being harmed as a result of a penalty that should be directed at Google. He claimed it is “crazy” for the court to determine that Google acted wrongly and allow the company to save money at Apple’s expense.

Additionally, Cue indicated that Google could maintain its prominent position in Safari even without a short-term agreement. He stated, “Today, we really don’t have an option,” and while Apple could negotiate a new deal with another provider, Google remains the best option for users.

Cue, who has been at Apple for nearly four decades, sees AI as a monumental technological shift. Putting himself in the judge’s perspective, Cue remarked that the arrival of AI is a stroke of luck, as without it, the court might have few options to act.

Despite his defense of Google’s search agreements, Cue seemed to acknowledge that the Justice Department’s proposal could accelerate the arrival of competitors in the search market, potentially changing the landscape eventually. He warned that in the tech sector, leading companies can quickly fall, even without judicial intervention, and argued that being an incumbent in this field does not guarantee permanence.