美国联邦法官 Amit Mehta 驳回了 Chegg 和 Penske Media 对 Google 的反垄断诉讼，裁定 Google 在 AI Overviews 等产品中的行为不构成违法，这对担心 AI 搜索影响流量的出版商而言是一次挫败。
<p>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 <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28712400-penske-and-chegg-v-google-dismissal/">ruled</a> that Google's conduct is not illegal under antitrust law.</p>
<p>The lawsuits were <a href="https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/02/education-tech-firm-sues-google-over-ai-search-summaries/">filed in 2025</a>, 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 <a href="https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/05/google-will-put-more-links-to-websites-in-ai-overviews/">alleged lost traffic</a>. 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.</p>
<p>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."</p><p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/10/antitrust-lawsuits-targeting-google-ai-search-dismissed-by-federal-judge/">Read full article</a></p>
<p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/10/antitrust-lawsuits-targeting-google-ai-search-dismissed-by-federal-judge/#comments">Comments</a></p>
# Judge dismisses Chegg and Penske antitrust lawsuits targeting Google AI search
Source: [https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/10/antitrust-lawsuits-targeting-google-ai-search-dismissed-by-federal-judge/](https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/10/antitrust-lawsuits-targeting-google-ai-search-dismissed-by-federal-judge/)
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](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28712400-penske-and-chegg-v-google-dismissal/)that Google’s conduct is not illegal under antitrust law\.
The lawsuits were[filed in 2025](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/02/education-tech-firm-sues-google-over-ai-search-summaries/), 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](https://arstechnica.com/google/2026/05/google-will-put-more-links-to-websites-in-ai-overviews/)\. 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](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/08/google-loses-dojs-big-monopoly-trial-over-search-business/)\. However, the government[didn’t get the harsh penalties](https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/09/google-wont-have-to-sell-chrome-judge-rules/)it wanted in that case\.
A federal judge dismissed antitrust lawsuits from Chegg and Penske Media that accused Google of abusing its monopoly power by using publisher content for AI Overviews while diverting search traffic away from their sites. The ruling notes publishers' claims don't meet antitrust standards, even as Google faces ongoing scrutiny over AI search's impact on web traffic.
A German court ruled that Google is liable for false statements made by its AI Overviews, rejecting Google's defense that users understand AI outputs may be inaccurate. The decision could have global implications for AI search engines and chatbots.
A US court has ruled that Google will not be forced to sell its ad exchange after losing an antitrust case. This concludes three major antitrust lawsuits against Google, resulting in limited consequences for the company.
A German court ruled that Google is directly liable for false information in its AI Overviews, as they constitute the company's own statements, not mere search results, setting a significant precedent for AI-generated content liability.
Google has officially filed its appeal against a federal ruling that deemed it an illegal search monopolist, arguing that it won the market fairly and that the court's remedies were excessive.