Google Should Not Be Broken Up, Says Perplexity AI CEO

In a LinkedIn post, Aravind Srinivas, CEO at Perplexity AI revealed that his company has been asked to testify in the Google-Department of Justice (DOJ) case.

He argued against splitting Chrome from Google, emphasizing Google’s contribution in open-sourcing Chromium—used by browsers like Microsoft Edge and Perplexity’s own Comet.

"Google should not be broken up. Chrome should remain within and continue to be run by Google," he said.

Choice is the Remedy | Aravind Srinivas | 122 comments

Perplexity has been asked to testify in the Google DOJ case. Our core points: 1. Google should not be broken up. Chrome should remain within and continue to be run by Google. Google deserves a lot of credit for open-sourcing Chromium, which powers Microsoft's Edge and will also power Perplexity's Comet. Chrome has become the dominant browser due to incredible execution quality at the scale of billions of users. 2. Android should become more open to consumer choice. There shouldn't be a tight coupling to the default apps set by Google, and the permission for OEMs to have the Play Store and Maps. Consumers should have the choice to pick who they want as a default search and default voice assistant, and OEMs should be able to offer consumers this choice without having to be blocked by Google on the ability to have the Play Store and other Google apps (Maps, YouTube). The DOJ is pushing for Chrome to be divested from Google. We don't believe anyone else can run a browser at that scale without a hit on quality, nor the business model to be able to serve that many users profitably by keeping the browser free. Chromium is open source, and others can build using that. Evidence: Microsoft Edge and Perplexity's upcoming Comet browser. The thing that is particularly frustrating about Google to us is how hard it is to change anything on Android. OEMs can only use a Google-approved version of Android, if they want to have core Google apps like PlayStore, Maps, etc. And "Google-approved" means keeping Google as the default search and Google/Gemini as the default voice assistants. OEMs feel threatened about any changes here even outside the defaults, because the magnitude of revenue sharing offered to them by Google to preserve the status quo even when better alternatives are available. Eg: Perplexity's Android Assistant is regarded as superior to Gemini. The remedy that is right in our opinion is not a breakup of Google; but rather offering consumers the choice to pick their defaults on Android without feeling the risk of a loss in revenue. That's what we will be proposing. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/gbSnHZut | 122 comments on LinkedIn

LinkedInAravind Srinivas

He asserted that no other company could maintain Chrome’s scale or quality while keeping it free for users.

Second, Srinivas advocated for more consumer choice within Android. He called for loosening the integration of default Google apps like Search and Maps, allowing OEMs to offer alternatives without risking access to critical services like the Play Store.

"If a phone maker wants to include any of Google's apps like Google Maps or the Play Store, they're required to include all of them. They also have to preload Google Search and Google Assistant as required defaults and limit alternatives for their users," the company said in a blog post.

"OEMs feel threatened about any changes here even outside the defaults, because the magnitude of revenue sharing offered to them by Google to preserve the status quo even when better alternatives are available. Eg: Perplexity's Android Assistant is regarded as superior to Gemini," Srinivas added.

Google and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) faced off in a Washington courtroom in a high-stakes antitrust case. The DOJ has accused the tech giant of maintaining an illegal monopoly in online search and aims to block its use of artificial intelligence to further consolidate that dominance.

The DOJ is pushing for a sweeping order that could force Google to divest its Chrome browser and implement structural changes to dismantle what it alleges is an unfair grip on the search market.

“It’s time to tell Google—and all other monopolists listening—that there are consequences for breaking antitrust laws,” said DOJ attorney David Dahlquist during his opening statement. The case, if successful, could fundamentally reshape Google’s business model.

The trial will see testimony from several major players in tech and AI, including DuckDuckGo, Microsoft’s Bing, Yahoo, and OpenAI.