According to the U.S. Justice Department, it has brought a sweeping proposal to force Google to break up pieces of its business, which may usher in the first big corporate breakup in nearly four decades and reshape one of the world's most valuable tech companies.

A 32-page potential remedies filing in the case against Google's monopolies over search and search advertising has been filed by the Department of Justice and a coalition of state attorneys general on Tuesday. The remedies framework proposed is submitted to the U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta who ruled against Google in a landmark antitrust case last August, presenting a range of options including behavioral restrictions and more drastic structural measures.

DOJ has tried remedies in four areas: 

Distribution of search: The DOJ sought elimination or restraint of default search agreements, pre-installation, and revenue-sharing deals. It mandated structural remedies to separate Chrome, Play, and/or Android from Google. There shall also be curbing of Google's dominance over new generation search technologies that include AI features. User education programs that allow informed choices about search engines shall be done.
Data Access and Use: Tell Google to make its search index, data, algorithms, and AI models publicly available. Demand that search results, features, and ad ranking signals be transparent. Compel Google not to exploit information that can't be made public so as not to violate the privacy of some of this data. Implement measures that will reduce the cost of competitors to index and retain data.
Expand Search Monopoly: Prohibit Google from using contracts to limit competitors' access to web content and permit publisher websites to opt out of training AI or appearing in Google-owned AI products, such as AI summaries.
Advertising Practices: Limit or redesign Google's advanced ad products, including its AI-based tools. Consider licensing Google's ad feed separately from search results. Increase advertiser transparency with more detailed auction and monetization reporting.
The DoJ also explained some of its logic around proposed remedies and why currently smaller revenue sources, such as artificial intelligence-based tools, should also be included. Remedies, it said, "should account for alternative and future forms of monopoly maintenance," and that they should serve to "unfetter these markets from Google's exclusionary conduct," remove barriers to competition, and "deny Google the fruits of its statutory violations.".

In a Tuesday evening blog post, Google responded with criticism, calling Justice's suggestion "radical and sweeping," and threatening "negative unintended consequences for American innovation and America's consumers."

"The remedy goes a mile wide and an inch deep" and is "far-reaching," Bernstein analysts cautioned Wednesday in a note to clients.

The last thing Google needs at this point in the overall AI war is a fight with one hand tied behind its back by regulators," they wrote.

Reporting by Ingrid Lunden