“This was purely a technical glitch,” said Miles Vanderlay, Google’s Director of Coincidental Errors. “Our helpful algorithms simply determined that a federal judge threatening our profits constitutes ‘harmful content.’ We prioritize high-quality results for our users, like sponsored ads for credit cards, not legal opinions that might lower our stock price.”

The situation worsened when the courtroom’s Wi-Fi began redirecting Department of Justice lawyers to a generic help page whenever they attempted to reference monopoly laws. Google’s legal team argued that breaking up their business would be too difficult, while their software simultaneously attempted to auction off the judge’s gavel to the highest bidder in a real-time ad exchange.

“We aren’t a monopoly,” insisted Sarah Hype, VP of Defining Words Differently. “We are simply a very popular, unavoidable service that accidentally deletes its critics from the internet. There is a distinct difference.”

At publishing time, Google announced it had resolved the lawsuit by acquiring the Department of Justice for $50 and a free Gmail account.

Inspired by actual events.