A federal judge published a historic statement last year and said that Google had become a monopolist when searching for the internet. But in a hearing that started last week to find out how to solve the problem, the emphasis often landed on another technology, artificial intelligence.
In the American court in Washington last week, a lawyer from the Ministry of Justice argued that Google could use his search monopoly to become the dominant player in AI Google managers, internal discussions about expanding Gemini's reach, the AI chatbot of the company. And managers of rival AI companies said that Google's power was an obstacle for their success.
On Wednesday, the first substantial question asked the Chief Executive of Google, Sundar Pichai, after taking the position also about AI during his 90 -minute testimony, the subject came up more than two dozen times.
“I think it's one of the most dynamic moments in the industry,” said Mr. Pichai. “I have seen users' home screens with, such as seven to nine applications of chatbots that they try and play and train.”
An antitrust lawsuit over the past has effectively become a fight for the future, because the government and Google are confronted with proposed changes in the activities of the technology giant that could shift the course of the AI race.
For more than 20 years, Google's search engine dominated the way in which people received answers online. Now the federal court is essentially struggling with the question whether the Silicon Valley Giant will dominate the next era of how people get information on the internet, while consumers turn to a new harvest of AI chatbots to answer questions, find solutions to their problems and learn about the world.
During the hearing, government lawyers argued that Google's monopolistic tactics can be used to make its Gemini -Chatbot an ubiquitous AI product. This cannot be allowed in the emerging area of AI, the government has said to ensure that consumers have good choices for use in the future.
Google has argued that the court does not have to intervene because the rapid growth of OpenAI-de AI-start-up that helps to feed the AI product of Apple on the iPhone and other rivals shows that the market is already with competition.
How much right Amit P. Mehta, who will determine the solutions in the search, buys the fierce competition reformed in these AI arguments to lead the technology. Google is already a leading AI player, where Gemini attracts more than 350 million monthly active users according to data during the test. All measures to hinder his efforts or to help his competitors would have major implications for that race.
The government has asked the court to force Google to sell its Chrome browser and share data with rivals, including the search results and advertisements, among other things.
Government requests to determine monopolies are naturally future -oriented and try to reverse years of damaged competition and opening markets for new rivals. From the government's perspective: “You do not want to have spent five years and a whole series of resources of freedom of choice that a case does not really do something,” says John Newman, the deputy director of the Bureau of Competition of the Federal Trade Commission during the reflection administration.
A Google spokesperson pointed to the opening statement of the company's main lawyer, John Schmidtlein, who said that the market for artificial intelligence was “performing extremely competitive.” The Ministry of Justice refused to comment.
The hearing this year follows the ruling of Judge Mehta that Google had illegally protected its monopoly by paying companies such as Apple, Mozilla and Samsung for his search engine to automatically get to web browsers and smartphones.
From the start of the hearing, government lawyers put AI in the front and in the middle.
The first witness, university lecturer computer sciences of the University of Texas, Gregory Durrett, Judge Mehta gave an emergency course on AI in response, Judge Mehta asked questions about how chatbots work and how they were included in Google's products.
The government presented documents that showed that Google had considered a scheme last year with wireless carriers and smartphone manufacturers who would have given Gemini Prime placement on devices next to the search engine. It was reminiscent of the deals that Google had signed to get an excellent placement for his search engine.
Google decided not to continue with the Gemini plan with wireless carriers and smartphone makers after the court's search last year. It eventually reached a separate deal with Samsung to put Gemini on the smartphones of Samsung, according to the documents.
A Google director testified that the agreement with Samsung gave the smartphone maker the opportunity to work with other AI services. Mr Pichai testified that the company had focused on signing deals that are tailored to his own proposal for remedies, which says that smartphone makers should have more freedom to decide what to install Google Apps.
Managers of rival AI companies, such as OpenAI, also testified that the proposed changes of the government in Google's activities would make it easier for them to build products and reach consumers.
Nicholas Turley, the head of the product for the Chatgpt of OpenAi, said in the stands that his company had rolled out a prototype search tool in July and Google had asked to gain a deal to access its data. But Google rejected OpenAi because “it would entail too many complexities”, according to an e -mail from an OpenAi director.
“I was aware that Google might not be encouraged to offer our good conditions in view of the competitiveness of some of our offers,” said Mr. Turley. If Judge Mehta Google would require more data with OpenAI, the company would be able to “build a better product faster,” he added.
OpenAi would also be interested in buying the Chrome browser from Google if it was for sale, Mr Turley added.
(The New York Times has sued OpenAi and his partner, Microsoft, for infringing the copyright of news content with regard to AI systems. They have denied misconduct.)
Dmitry Shevelenko, the Chief Business Officer of the AI search arrangement of the AI search, testified that his company had tried to reach deals with telephone companies to automatically offer the chatbot but one of them already had a scheme with Google.
That company “really loves our assistant thinks it is great for their users, but they cannot come from their Google obligations, so they cannot change the standard assistant on the device,” he said.
Google's lawyers argued that the company did not lock any smartphone makers to restricting deals to offer Gemini. They repeatedly said that many AI companies flourished and referred to data that showed that chatgpt was used wider than any other chatbot.
“I think Chatgpt is doing fine without the remedies in this case,” said Mr. Schmidlein in his opening statement. “These companies compete well without remedies from claimants.”
