Introduction to the Case
Yelp’s antitrust case against Google has just survived a critical test. While a judge tossed several claims, she allowed Yelp’s core challenge – focused on Google’s alleged monopoly in local search – to move forward. The broader battle over Big Tech’s power is far from over. The central claims that Google unfairly used its dominance in the local search and local ad markets are now headed toward a jury trial.
The Potential Impact
If Yelp prevails, the case could significantly reshape the structure of local search in the U.S. and beyond. Even if it doesn’t, the discovery process alone may offer an unprecedented window into Google’s internal thinking around local search. The case has the potential to change the way local search results are displayed and could impact Google’s ability to introduce new features to local search.
The Ruling
Last week, Judge Susan Van Keulen of the U.S. District Court for Northern California denied in part Google’s motion to dismiss the case. She ruled that Yelp’s key allegations – that Google monopolized and abused its control over local search and local advertising – were plausible enough to proceed. The judge noted that the clock starts ticking not when the conduct occurred, but when the defendant both possessed monopoly power in the relevant market and engaged in exclusionary conduct that injured the plaintiff.
Statute of Limitations
Google argued that its conduct, such as changes to search results design and integration of local content, dated back to at least 2007 and that Yelp’s claims were therefore filed too late. The judge disagreed, holding that for claims under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, the clock starts ticking not when the conduct occurred, but when the defendant both possessed monopoly power in the relevant market and engaged in exclusionary conduct that injured the plaintiff.
Where Google’s Motion to Dismiss Succeeded
The judge did, however, dismiss Yelp’s claims that Google used its general search monopoly to force users into its local search services (tying) and to gain dominance in local search advertising (monopoly leveraging). She agreed with Google that the tying claim was time-barred and that Yelp hadn’t properly shown unfair expansion into new markets. However, the court granted Yelp the opportunity to amend its tying claim.
Why This Case Matters
This is the first time anyone has examined Google’s behavior in local search, including how it won its monopoly and the impact that has had on local search and local ads, both within Google and across the broader local ecosystem. If the court finds Google’s practices unlawful, it could force changes:
- Local search, as we know it, could dramatically change. It could spell the end of the Local Pack.
- Local ads, particularly Local Service Ads (LSAs), exemplify the kind of new, exclusionary behavior Google has leveraged to dramatically reduce organic and local opportunities.
- The outcome could also influence the EU’s interpretation of Google’s monopoly under the newly implemented DMA regulations.
- Any decision could also impact Google’s ability to introduce new AI features to local search, particularly features like local AI Overviews or “Learn something specific” that could be construed as a form of exclusionary local behavior.
What We May Discover
As with the U.S. government cases against Google, discovery is likely to uncover fascinating details about how Google positions local search – and, hopefully, some algorithmic insights into how local search and ads actually function. Even if Yelp ultimately loses, the discovery process could still offer an unprecedented look inside Google Local and LSAs, giving us the first definitive glimpse into the world in which we live, work, and breathe.
Conclusion
The case between Yelp and Google is a significant one, with the potential to change the way local search results are displayed and impact Google’s ability to introduce new features to local search. The discovery process is likely to uncover fascinating details about how Google positions local search and may offer an unprecedented look inside Google Local and LSAs. The outcome of the case will be closely watched, and its impact could be felt for years to come. With the next steps including whether Yelp amends its tying claims, a discovery phase, and an attempt at alternative dispute resolution, this process is likely to take about 18 months, with a trial potentially occurring around the end of 2026.