In court, the CEO defends his company against the DOJ

The Google-DoJ case against Google: a search engine that does not sell search data to Google unless it is ordered to do so

Whatever Mehta decides in this remedy phase, Cooper thinks it will have effects beyond just the business of search engines. She said it will have some kind of impact on the artificial intelligence.

The Justice Department wrapped its case on Tuesday and by Wednesday, it was clear that there would be testimony from executives from companies like Apple and Mozilla. Google maintains that it will appeal Mehta’s underlying ruling once the penalty phase of the trial is over.

This week the trial continues, with the DOJ calling its final witnesses this morning to testify about the feasibility of a Chrome divestiture and how the government’s proposed remedies would help rivals compete. On Tuesday afternoon, Google will begin presenting its case, which is expected to feature the testimony of CEO Sundar Pichai, although the date of his appearance has not been specified.

Despite testifying in court (for which he was subpoenaed, Shevelenko noted), he and other leaders at Perplexity are against the breakup of Google. In a statement on the company’s website, the Perplexity team wrote that they did not believe that forcing Google to sell off Chrome or license search data to its competitors was the best solution. Consumers deserve choice, but neither of these address it, they wrote.

But Google’s attorney, Christopher Yeager, noted in questioning Shevelenko that Perplexity has reached a valuation of over $9 billion — insinuating the company is doing just fine in the marketplace.

Google and OpenAI aren’t going to do well in online search: A federal judge challenges Google’s attempt to partner with a third party

They show that there were 35 million daily users and 350 million monthly users in March. That was up from 9 million daily active users in October 2024. The documents show that it was still lagging behind the 600 million active users and 160 million daily users of chat gupt.

The government argues that to level the playing field, Google should be forced to open its search data — like users’ search queries, clicks and results — and license it to other competitors at a cost.

In the past few days before a federal judge, the DOJ has argued that the company can use artificial intelligence to strengthen its monopoly in online search and become the dominant player in the field, by using the data from its powerful search index.

In court, the DOJ says that in order to distribute the software, Google has to pay a large sum of money to a third party.

Perplexity AIs not preloaded on any mobile devices in the U.S., despite many efforts to get phone companies to establish Perplexity as a default or exclusive app on devices, Shevelenko said. He compared Google’s control in that space to that of a “mob boss.”

In court, Google’s lawyers have previously argued that ChatGPT and Meta’s MetaAI chatbots outstrip Gemini’s popularity, evidence that Google is not dominating in this marketplace.

They wanted a partnership with a third party search provider. Turley said that OpenAI tried to make a deal with Google in order to get access to their search, but that they were turned down.

OpenAI couldn’t build their own index fast enough to address their problems; they found that process incredibly expensive, time consuming and potentially years from coming to fruition, Turley said.

OpenAI, Meta, Perplexity and Google: The Case against Artificial Intelligence for the Search Industry in the 2022 Google Ad Hoc Trial

Though popular, ChatGPT had its drawbacks, like the bot’s limited “knowledge,” Turley said. The internet was not connected to the server early on, meaning that it could only use information that had been fed to it. For example, Turley said, if a user asked “Who is the president?” The program will give an answer in 2022, when its “knowledge” stops.

Turley testified that after ChatGPT became a viral hit, OpenAI tried to develop their own search index, but it was too expensive and time consuming. He said that they tried to forge a relationship with a third party provider, but were turned down.

Nick Turley, the head of Open Artificial intelligence’s product for ChatGpt, was called to testify by the DOJ in an attempt to convince people that the monopoly on search could eventually lead to artificial intelligence. Turley stated that the company wanted access to the data and search index of Google to improve its technology. The search index is a big database of pages on the internet. When you type a query into the search engine, it scans the database to bring you links to other websites.

She explained that if you look at search as a product, you can’t think about it without thinking about artificial intelligence. The case is a good opportunity to scrutinize how Google has benefited from its dominance in search, and make sure that the behavior that led to it cannot be used to gain an unfair advantage in other markets.

It should be no surprise that AI is coming up so much at this point in the trial, said Alissa Cooper, the executive director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, a nonpartisan tech research and policy center at Georgetown University focusing on AI, disinformation and data privacy.

John E.Schmidtlein, a lawyer for Google, said during his opening statement that the competition in that market is abundant and that the usage of Meta and ChatGgt is way ahead of everyone else. Don’t take my word for it. Look at the data. Hundreds and hundreds of millions of downloads are made by ChatGPT.

In court, lawyers for the search giant have argued that there are other artificial intelligence companies with better products than Gemini. OpenAI has ChatGPT, Meta has MetaAI and Perplexity has Perplexity AI.

The Justice Department argues Google’s monopoly over search could have a direct effect on the development of generative AI, a type of artificial intelligence that uses existing data to create new content like text, videos or photos, based on a user’s prompts or questions. The government called executives from several major AI companies in an attempt to argue that the companies lack growth potential because of their dependence on search.

Search engine indices are giant databases of pages and information on the web and they are connected to Artificial Intelligence. According to court documents, the index that Google has is more than 100,000,000 gigabytes in size. This is the data the search engine scans when they respond to a query.

The integration of search and Gemini, the company’s AI chatbot — which the DOJ sees as powerful fuel for this cycle — is a big focus of the government’s proposed remedies. The DOJ argues that any penalties approved by the court that don’t include Gemini (or other Google AI products now or in the future, which would undermine their broader efforts) would be a mistake because they need to address all ways users access Google search.

“AI is one of the most profound technologies humans will ever work on,” Pichai said. He testified that the top 3 companies in the world spending on artificial intelligence research and development areGoogle, IBM and Microsoft.

He said the government’s proposal feels as though it wants to sell off the company’s core intellectual property. He said it is unclear how the innovation fund could be made up of if the work is to be given away.

The government believes that the world’s most used browser powers the company’s advertising business and therefore should be spun off. Splitting it off would make the market more competitive, according to the DOJ.

Pichai, 52, addressed the court from the witness box wearing a neat, dark suit during the second week of the remedies trial that will determine which penalties U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta will levy against the nearly $2 trillion company. A year ago Mehta ruled that the search engine giant acted illegally to maintain its hold on the market.

Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai testified in federal court Wednesday that a Justice Department proposal that would force Google to share its search data, including with competitors, would be a “de facto divestiture” of the company’s search engine that took decades of investment and innovation to build.

Language Models With Large Databases : A Case Study on Chatbot Using Large SubdblNext-to-Large Databases

The big databases like this can be used to train large language models like chatbots so that they can engage in conversations.