| The rise of OpenAI's ChatGPT has sparked talk of a new model of search in which artificial intelligence delivers decisive answers, rather than the page of links popularized by Google. But the biggest challenge for companies hoping to capitalize on that idea has been a lack of data — the kind that Google amassed through decades of running the internet's dominant search engine. Enter the US Justice Department, which last month proposed major changes to Google after a federal judge's landmark ruling that the tech giant illegally monopolized online search. The DOJ's proposed remedies include a forced sale of Google's Chrome browser and a provision forcing the tech giant to make the data it uses to generate search results available to rivals. Together, those two steps could upend search. The DOJ isn't taking a position on who Google should sell Chrome to, but people familiar with the agency's thinking say it sees a wide range of possibilities. Options include US-based AI startups like OpenAI or Perplexity, or even an investment firm hoping to enter the red-hot market for generative AI services. A new owner for Chrome, combined with the ability to replicate Google's search results, could "completely transform the advertising market," said Adam Epstein, the chief executive of adMarketplace, who met with the DOJ multiple times as the agency mulled its proposal for the judge.
Still, that scenario is a long shot. First, Judge Amit Mehta, who is overseeing the case and is expected to rule on a remedy this summer, may not go for the DOJ's proposals. (Google has signaled it would aggressively counter the agency's recommendations, which it called "wildly overbroad," when it submits its own views this month.) Second, sharing Google's data with other companies may not have the intended effect. The EU's Digital Markets Act requires something similar, but DuckDuckGo, a rival search engine, contends that in practice it provides "little to no utility to competing search engines."
Finally, whatever Judge Mehta rules might not come to pass. Two decades ago, a federal judge ordered a breakup of Microsoft. Then the US presidency switched parties and the new DOJ took a different approach. Microsoft reached a settlement with antitrust prosecutors for a diminished penalty. — Davey Alba and Leah Nylen, Bloomberg News | 
No comments:
Post a Comment