Google Hit With Renewed Antitrust Suit Over Voice Assistants

Alphabet Inc.'s Google was hit Tuesday with a renewed antitrust action alleging that the tech giant used its monopoly position in general search to set restrictive policies on voice assistants.

Sensory Inc., a Silicon Valley-based company that develops voice recognition technology, said that Google “constructed a series of artificial barriers” to prevent consumers from using voice assistants and “wakeword” software—which is the technology that triggers engagement from voice assistants—to access non-Google search engines. The lawsuit resurrects one originally filed in April 2022, which was dismissed under a tolling agreement to allow then-pending antitrust litigation against Google to play out.

The US District Court for the District of Columbia found in August in the separate litigation outlined in the tolling agreement that the company had illegally monopolized the search market using exclusivity deals, making its search engine the default product on most smartphones and web browsers. Sensory’s lawsuit said the company used its monopoly power to extend its anticompetitive behavior, barring hardware manufacturers from allowing consumers to select between Google Assistant and competitors with access to alternative search engines.

“Sensory was not only restricted in deploying a Google wakeword but could not deploy its multi-wakeword technology with the Google Assistant,” the complaint said. “Google’s requirements make other voice assistants so cumbersome to use that they are effectively blocked.”

Google’s restrictions on voice recognition and wakeword technology extends to mobile devices, home electronics, and automobiles, Sensory’s complaint said. In cases where the company doesn’t directly own the consumer-facing voice assistant, Google contracts to ensure competitors like Apple’s Siri and Samsung’s Bixby use Google’s search engine to browse the web.

Google didn’t immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

Global IP Law Group LLC represents Sensory.

The case is Sensory, Inc. v. Google, LLC, D.D.C., No. 1:24-cv-02788, 10/1/24.