Technology and Science · updated 1h ago · 3 min read
Amit Mehta Dismisses Chegg And Penske Media Antitrust Lawsuits Against Google AI Overviews
Judge Amit Mehta dismissed Chegg and Penske's antitrust lawsuits against Google's AI Overviews. Court ruled the publishers failed to show antitrust violation or reciprocal dealing.
13 outlets told this the same way.
4 of 5 outlets skipped it: court dismissal was without prejudice but final and appealable in Penske case..
13outlets compared
Judge Rejects Antitrust Claims
A US federal judge dismissed antitrust lawsuits filed by Chegg and Penske Media Corporation against Google over AI Overviews, with US District Judge Amit Mehta ruling that the companies failed to show Google’s conduct was illegal under antitrust law.
“But an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works.”
Mehta wrote, "Plaintiffs have pleaded only that they have an 'expectation' that Google will send them search traffic if they make their content available for free," and he added, "But an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works."
Chegg accused Google of antitrust violations in products like AI overviews, arguing that Google illegally scraped its educational content and that Gemini models could essentially recreate that content and reduce site traffic.
Penske Media Corporation, which owns publications including Rolling Stone and Variety, argued that it was unfair that sites indexed for organic search would also have their content harvested for AI answers, with no way to opt out.
Mehta dismissed the claims "fail to get out of the starting gate," and the ruling covered both Chegg and Penske Media Corp in the US District Court for the District of Columbia.
Court Points to Lawmakers
Mehta acknowledged the publishers’ situation while still rejecting the legal theory, writing that "The court does not treat Plaintiffs' alleged harms lightly" and that he was "not unsympathetic" to publishers whose content Google takes and repurposes without compensation. The judge pushed the economic question away from antitrust court, saying antitrust law cannot substitute for "the power of legislators to address how innovation may cause economic harm." Mehta granted Google’s motion to dismiss in the Penske case without prejudice and described the order as final and appealable, while also quoting the court’s view that plaintiffs failed to establish antitrust standing.
Mehta dismissed the lawsuits after finding the companies did not make a compelling case that Google was leveraging a monopoly, and Mehta quoted Mehta’s expectation-versus-agreement language from the ruling. Engadget said Mehta dismissed the lawsuits after finding the companies did not make a compelling case that Google was leveraging a monopoly, and it quoted Mehta’s expectation-versus-agreement language from the ruling.
What the Ruling Leaves Open
The lawsuits centered on whether Google’s AI Overviews and AI-generated answers diverted readers away from publisher websites, and Reuters said Chegg and Penske alleged they lost revenue from reduced traffic.
The plaintiffs argued that Google forced publishers to allow AI overviews of their material if they wanted to remain indexed in Google’s search results, while Google countered that it had no obligation to index publishers’ content on their preferred terms.
Mehta dismissed the cases in a 41-page opinion dated Wednesday, Sept. 30, and Mehta also dismissed Penske’s separate claim that Google unlawfully tied AI Overviews to search.
Publishers continued to see effects of Google’s AI-powered search overhaul, and traffic to news outlets and small websites took a steep dive even as the court sided with Google.
Google was paying around 100 publishers for their contributions to AI Overviews, AI Mode, and Gemini as part of a pilot program, and it framed that payment as ongoing even after the dismissal.