When you opened this story, in all likelihood you used Google Chrome to do it.

The ubiquitous internet browser, owned by US tech giant Alphabet, is the preferred platform for an estimated 65 per cent of the world’s web users – both on the computers or smartphones.

US authorities say this massive market share and default use on Android devices is allowing Alphabet – which also owns YouTube and Fitbit among a host of other companies – to  disadvantage its competitors.

The US Department of Justice has proposed that Alphabet be forced to sell the Google Chrome after a landmark anti-trust lawsuit in August found that it had illegally suppressed competition through billion-dollar deals with companies like Apple and Samsung.

The DOJ is also asking the judge to force Google to sell Android or bar the company from making its services mandatory on devices using the operating system.

As the world awaits the ruling, how would such a seismic shift in the online landscape affect Australian users?

Dr Rob Nicholls, a technology and regulation researcher at The University of Sydney, says Google is unlikely to cease providing search services because of the decision.

“From an Australian perspective, the change would mean that Chrome is just another browser, in the same way that you can use Firefox, Opera, or Duck Duck Go on a device,” he said.

“We have already seen Telstra, Optus, and TPG/Vodafone given undertakings to the ACCC that they will not enter into any arrangement with Google, which gives Google preinstallation or default rights for Google’s search services in respect of devices that they supply.”

War with tech

Google has already been found to have engaged in monopolistic behaviour during the anti-trust lawsuit and now the courts are debating how it will remedy the findings.

“In order to safeguard against the possibility of further foreclosure and exclusion of rivals and potential entrants, including via self-preferencing, the proposed final judgement requires Google to divest Chrome,” the filing said.

“As the court recognised, ‘Google’s near-complete control of the most efficient search distribution channels is a major barrier to entry,’ and the Chrome default is ‘a market reality that significantly narrows the available channels of distribution and thus disincentivizes the emergence of new competition’.”

Alphabet is expected to file its own proposed solutions to the DOJ’s case.

Kent Walker, president of global affairs and chief legal officer at Google and Alphabet, said that the proposal is wildly “overbroard” and will break Google products beyond its search engines.

“DOJ had a chance to propose remedies related to the issue in this case: search distribution agreements with Apple, Mozilla, smartphone OEMs, and wireless carriers,” he said in a blog post.

“Instead, DOJ chose to push a radical interventionist agenda that would harm Americans and America’s global technology leadership.”

The search ads business contributed in more than half of Alphabet’s total revenue of US$88.3 billion ($136 billion) in the latest quarter alone.

Megan Gray, a former attorney at the Federal Trade Commission, said the loss of Chrome to Alphabet would be devastating.

“The reason why it’s valuable to Google is because Google uses it to enhance its ad business and its search business,” Gray said.

The future

Although the Department of Justice has launched several high-profile cases against large tech companies in recent years, forcing Google to sell Chrome would be a significant broadside that would cut into Alphabets’s 24 billion profit each quarter.

Nicholls said that President-elect Donald Trump “seemed to suggest breaking up Google isn’t in US national interest”.

“This may not guarantee that this remedy will not happen, nor does it mean that big tech will be free to operate as they please in the future,” he said.

“To some extent, Elon Musk’s views will be important here. The views of former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, the latest candidate to be Attorney General, are not clear.”

Elon Musk has been a key ally to Trump. Photo: AAP

Aside from Google, the DOJ has also targeted Apple over its blocking of rivals from accessing its hardware and software features through its control of the app store.

Apple is asking the judge to throw out the case completely before any trial who said he will make a decision on the application by January.