Google’s antitrust trial takes a turn as it subpoenas AI competitors

In a significant development in the ongoing antitrust trial concerning Google’s search practices, the tech giant has issued subpoenas to three of its leading competitors in the AI space: OpenAI, Perplexity AI, and Microsoft. The subpoenas, unsealed in October, were made public in legal documents filed after the closing arguments of the trial held in federal court. The case is being closely monitored as it follows the Department of Justice (DOJ) and various states alleging that Google’s dominance in digital advertising constitutes anti-competitive behaviour.

The attorneys representing Google are gathering information from these rival companies to bolster their defence, arguing that the burgeoning field of AI-enhanced search technologies does not fall under the purview of Google’s purported search monopoly. The requested information centres on how rivals are innovating in the realms of search and advertising, which Google claims will highlight its competitive position in the evolving market.

Specifically, Google’s subpoenas request critical data and documents from each company. For OpenAI, the tech firm is obliged to produce usage information for its chatbot, ChatGPT, along with distribution agreements, details about its collaboration with Microsoft regarding the Bing Search API, and records related to the training data utilised for its AI models. Google is also pursuing insights into OpenAI’s advertising strategies and potential partnerships.

Perplexity AI has been asked to furnish data that includes download statistics, active user metrics, and financial performance reports. Similar to OpenAI, Google has requested details concerning its content licensing agreements, AI training data, and any communications with the DOJ relating to this case.

In Microsoft’s case, the demands encompass agreements with its partners like OpenAI and Perplexity, documentation pertaining to data used in their AI model training, and any licensing agreements that include exclusive deals. The company must also provide information on how it leverages generative AI technologies in search and advertising.

Responses to these subpoenas vary among the three companies. Perplexity initially claimed it had not received a subpoena but later said that it will submit objections by early next month and begin document production by January. OpenAI has cooperated with some aspects of Google’s request, including disclosures about its API usage and board discussions, while objecting to certain demands centred on its financial data, which it asserts contain highly confidential business information. Microsoft stated it would comply with most requests but raised objections for four specific points, citing concerns on relevance and proportionality.

The ramifications of these legal developments could extend well beyond this initial stage, with predictions suggesting that the resolution phase may span months or even years. This protracted litigation period could provide Google with opportunities to enhance its AI search platform, Gemini, which directly competes with offerings from OpenAI and Perplexity.

Market observers, however, express concern regarding the implications of Google’s continued dominance in the search marketplace. According to industry analysts, if Google maintains its existing distribution channels, there could be substantial hurdles for newer entrants in the AI-driven search landscape to establish a foothold. Adam Epstein, CEO of AdMarketplace, remarked on the risk of Google consolidating its position further if it manages to retain exclusive search capabilities, thereby stifling competition for companies like Perplexity and OpenAI.

Moreover, experts believe that achieving significant market share for challengers in the search domain will be an arduous process. Evelyn Mitchell-Wolf, a senior analyst with eMarketer, recognises that both user and advertiser perceptions will be slow to shift as companies like Perplexity scale up operations. She noted that existing consumer habits heavily favour traditional search platforms, complicating efforts by new AI-based alternatives to gain traction in an increasingly competitive landscape.

The DOJ’s recent proposal to compel Google to divest its Chrome browser adds another layer of complexity to the legal proceedings. Analysts are paying keen attention to the upcoming remedies trial scheduled for March, given its potential to redefine the competitive landscape in digital advertising and search. However, the precise nature of the remedy phase continues to be a topic of speculation, as the complexities of both trials intertwine in unforeseen ways.

Source: Noah Wire Services