An OpenAI executive said the company would consider acquiring Google’s Chrome browser if regulators force Alphabet to sell it as part of efforts to boost competition in search, according to Reuters.
Nick Turley, head of product for ChatGPT, made the comment during Google’s antitrust trial in Washington, where the US Department of Justice is pressing for broad measures to break Google’s dominance in online search. A judge previously ruled that Google holds a monopoly in search and related advertising markets, though the company plans to appeal.
Google has not put Chrome up for sale, but Turley’s remarks offered a glimpse into how major players in artificial intelligence are watching the case. The trial is also shedding light on the broader generative AI landscape, where companies are racing to build tools and expand their user base.
In opening statements, government lawyers raised concerns that Google’s strength in search could give it an edge in AI by funnelling users to its own services. Google, for its part, argued that the generative AI market is competitive, pointing to offerings from Microsoft and Meta.
An internal OpenAI document presented during the trial showed Turley previously wrote that ChatGPT was leading in the chatbot space and didn’t see Google as its biggest rival. On the stand, Turley clarified that the document was intended to motivate employees and did not reflect the company’s full strategic view. He also said OpenAI still values partnerships, including potential collaborations around distribution.
Turley testified that OpenAI had tried to partner with Google to integrate its search technology into ChatGPT. After facing issues with its existing search provider, OpenAI approached Google last July, suggesting that access to Google’s API could improve the quality of ChatGPT responses. Google turned down the request the following month, citing the presence of too many competitors.
“We have no partnership with Google today,” Turley said.
He added that the DOJ’s proposal to make Google share its search data could support OpenAI’s ability to deliver more accurate and timely results to users. Search remains important for ChatGPT, especially when it comes to addressing real-time queries, he said. According to Turley, ChatGPT is still years away from being able to independently handle around 80% of such questions using its own search system.
The trial also revisited how Google has structured its deals with device makers. In August, US District Judge Amit Mehta found that Google used exclusive contracts to keep its search engine as the default on Android devices, including those made by Samsung. Documents presented in court showed that Google had discussed bundling exclusivity not only for search, but also for its Chrome browser and Gemini AI app.
However, more recent agreements between Google and partners like Samsung, Motorola, AT&T, and Verizon have shifted. These newer deals allow pre-installation of competing services, reflecting a more open approach. That shift appears to align with Google’s argument that exclusive arrangements are no longer necessary.
Still, the Justice Department is pushing for stricter remedies. It wants the court to ban Google from paying partners to prioritise its search engine, a move it says is needed to create space for rival offerings.
Peter Fitzgerald, a Google executive, testified that the company recently reminded its partners that they are free to include other AI tools on new devices. Letters reiterating this position were sent as recently as last week, he said.
While the DOJ is seeking structural changes—including limits on the payments Google can offer to secure default status on devices—some legal experts say a sweeping outcome may be unlikely in the near term.
“The DOJ’s stance does appear robust, but in actuality, the likelihood of a swift resolution that requires Google to make sweeping changes to its business structure in the immediate term is remote,” said Gareth Mills, partner at law firm Charles Russell Speechlys.
“The DOJ’s position has definite echoes of the similarly robust stance taken against Microsoft in the 1990s concerning the emerging software market, which (despite an initial ruling stating that Microsoft should be split up) instead led to years of negotiation and appeals, with Microsoft eventually emerging intact, although subject to greater regulatory constraints via its settlement with the DOJ,” he said. “It is also notable that in its submissions, Google has quoted the Microsoft case.”
Mills added that while the trial has far-reaching implications, immediate consequences are unlikely. “That is not to minimise the importance of this case or the potential ramifications for Google, but anyone who expects a dramatic impact in the immediate term may be disappointed,” he said. “The importance of AI and how its usage develops as an industry is, however, clearly of concern to the DOJ and other regulators such as the CMA but like many matters involving the current tech giants, it would be naïve not to at least acknowledge that economics and politics could be as compelling factors as black-letter competition law principles as this case develops.”
(Photo by Unsplash)
See also: Google Cloud Next 25: AI, cloud, and WAN
Want to learn more about cybersecurity and the cloud from industry leaders? Check out Cyber Security & Cloud Expo taking place in Amsterdam, California, and London.
Explore other upcoming enterprise technology events and webinars powered by TechForge here.
