OpenAI and Perplexity are both eyeing Chrome if Google is forced to sell

Google’s been under the antitrust microscope for a while now, especially after last year’s court ruling finding it holds a monopoly in online search. While the final outcome is far from certain, the Justice Department threw a major curveball last month by suggesting Google might need to sell off the Chrome browser as part of the remedy. That’s a massive “what if,” but things got even wilder this week when not one, but two major AI players indicated they’d potentially be interested buyers.

First up was OpenAI. According to Bloomberg, Nick Turley, head of ChatGPT, testified at a hearing regarding the Google monopoly case. When asked directly if OpenAI would be interested in acquiring Chrome should Google be forced to divest, his answer was blunt: “Yes, we would, as would many other parties.”

Turley elaborated slightly, noting that while ChatGPT currently works via a Chrome plugin, OpenAI ownership could lead to deeper integrations, potentially showing users “what an AI first experience looks like.” The idea of the company behind ChatGPT controlling the world’s dominant browser certainly raises its own set of intriguing possibilities and potential concerns.

Then came Perplexity AI. Testifying under subpoena (after reportedly hesitating due to fear of retribution from Google), Chief Business Officer Dmitry Shevelenko also put his company’s name in the ring, according to a report from The Verge. When asked if anyone besides Google could run Chrome at its current scale and quality without charging users, Shevelenko confidently stated, “I think we could do it.” He even noted that Perplexity is already building its own Chromium-based browser called “Comet.”

However, Shevelenko’s testimony seemed less like a simple acquisition pitch and more like a strategic move to highlight Perplexity’s struggles against Google’s existing deals. He detailed the “jungle gym” required to set Perplexity as the default assistant on Android (admitting he, an iPhone user, needed help) and how even then, it lacks the wake-word (Hey, Google) convenience of Google Assistant. He said Google’s contracts with phone makers and carriers prevent companies from making deals to feature Perplexity more prominently due to the fear of losing revenue, even when those companies apparently wanted to feature Perplexity.

Interestingly, despite saying Perplexity could take over Chrome, Shevelenko expressed significant reservations about a forced sale, particularly to a competitor like OpenAI. He voiced concerns that a new owner might harm the open-source Chromium project (which powers Chrome, Edge, Brave, Opera, and many others) or fail to maintain it adequately.

“There’s all the self-serving incentive to be here today and shout about how evil Google is, and I think we want to be reasonable,” he stated, adding that Google builds good products others iterate on, and Perplexity wouldn’t want a remedy that “cripples Google’s ability to keep doing that.”

This really highlights the core tension: is the main problem Chrome itself, or Google’s exclusive distribution deals that leverage its search dominance? Google argues selling Chrome is “playing with fire,” while Perplexity seems more focused on dismantling those distribution agreements to allow fairer competition, even crediting Judge Mehta’s initial ruling for making companies comfortable even talking to them.

What Happens Next?

Well, the wheels of justice grind slowly, and whether Judge Mehta orders a Chrome divestiture, focuses on unwinding distribution deals, or takes another path entirely remains to be seen. But the fact that major AI players like OpenAI and Perplexity are publicly stating interest (however strategically motivated) in potentially acquiring Chrome adds a fascinating, high-stakes layer to this ongoing antitrust battle. The implications for Chrome, the open-source Chromium project, and the future of the web are potentially enormous. We’ll definitely be keeping a close watch on how this unfolds!