US judge dismisses Penske Media and Chegg antitrust suits over Google AI Overviews

What happened

On 30 September 2026, US District Judge Amit Mehta dismissed antitrust lawsuits brought by Penske Media Corporation (owner of Variety, The Hollywood Reporter and Rolling Stone) and education company Chegg over Google's AI Overviews. The publishers argued that AI-generated summaries cannibalise their search traffic and revenue, and that they cannot block Google from using their content in AI Overviews while remaining visible in ordinary search results — a loss of visibility they called 'devastating' in revenue terms. Penske said search traffic to affiliate-link content 'dropped dramatically', cutting organic affiliate revenue by more than a third from its peak to end of 2024.

The judge found no 'formal bargain' had ever been struck between the publishers and Google, so no claim under the Sherman Act could be proved: 'an expectation is not an agreement. It is simply how a general search engine works.' He also rejected a tying claim, finding search and AI Overviews are an integrated product rather than separate ones.

Why it matters to creators

This is the first court test of whether publishers can use antitrust law to win an opt-out from AI Overviews without losing search visibility — and the answer, at least from this judge, is no. Notably, Judge Mehta said he was not 'unsympathetic' to 'journalists, educators, and other online creators whose content Google takes and repurposes without compensation', but held that any gap in the law is for Congress or regulators to address. Google is separately rolling out an opt-out from AI Overviews in Search Console following a UK Competition and Markets Authority order, and is reportedly trialling a programme that pays publishers when their content makes a 'significant' contribution to AI features.

What is not yet known

Whether the publishers will appeal, and whether US lawmakers or regulators will take up the opt-out/compensation question that the court declined to resolve.