In August, a U.S. court ruled that Google has a search monopoly, and while Google will appeal, what kind of penalties could the Justice Department impose, including suspension of Chrome? We are considering.
As part of this process, the Justice Department hopes to call certain witnesses, according to recent court filings. According to Reuters, the chief executive officer of AI search provider Perplexity is Dmitry Shevelenko.
Perplexity and other generative AI tools, such as OpenAI's ChatGPT Search, can provide direct answers to complex queries, sometimes containing fabricated or inaccurate information. It has emerged as a potential alternative to Internet searches. Google responded to this threat with its own AI search tools, such as AI Overview, which provides AI-generated answers on top of search results.
The Justice Department wants to ask Mr. Shevelenko questions about “the relationship between generative AI and search access points, distribution, barriers to entry and expansion, and data sharing.”
A “search access point” is a term the Department of Justice uses to describe something like Google Chrome, and it's where people go to search the Internet.
The filing doesn't say exactly why the Justice Department wants to question Perplexity on these topics, but stronger penalties are likely because Google dominates the search business and crowds out potential competitors. could help the Justice Department's case that it deserves
TechCrunch asked Perplexity whether it had agreed to allow executives to testify and its thoughts on antitrust litigation. Perplexity did not immediately respond to a request for comment, as did Google.
Perplexity is effectively caught in the middle of the conflict. Both parties want information from Perplexity that will help their case. In October, Google asked Perplexity for company documents to assert its own competitive position in search. (Google also issued subpoenas to Microsoft and OpenAI.)
But Perplexity had yet to submit “a single document” to Google as of Dec. 11, the tech giant lamented in a court filing, noting that waiting two months “delays it further.” I can't think of any justification.”
Meanwhile, Perplexity said in its filing that it had already agreed to respond to 12 of Google's 14 document requests, but that it was “not interested in collecting such a potentially vast world of documents.” “We are still considering the burden that this will entail.”
Perplexity also agreed to provide copies of its license agreements “related to AI training,” but Google wants all of Perplexity's license agreements and asked Google to “meet and discuss” the matter. It also states: