Perplexity AI to Testify in DOJ’s Antitrust Case Against Google, Opposes Chrome Breakup

Perplexity AI is stepping into the spotlight in the Department of Justice’s high-stakes antitrust case against Google, as the AI startup confirms it has been asked to testify during the remedies phase of the historic trial. The company is using its platform to speak out against proposed structural penalties—particularly the idea of forcing Google to sell its Chrome browser.

According to a statement, the DOJ is considering aggressive measures following a court ruling that Google unlawfully maintained its monopoly in the search market. Now, the government is seeking structural changes, including the divestiture of Chrome, restrictions on AI-related deals, and a ban on exclusive default app agreements.

Perplexity AI CEO Aravind Srinivas confirmed in a tweet that his company has been invited to participate in the court’s next phase. “We don’t believe anyone else can run a browser at that scale without a hit on quality,” Srinivas said, pushing back against the notion that divesting Chrome would benefit consumers. Per Reuters, Perplexity has also formally urged the court to reject sweeping structural changes and instead focus on solutions that enhance user choice and market fairness.

Related: DOJ Warns Google Could Use AI Tools to Extend Search Monopoly As Antitrust Remedies Trial Begins

The invitation to testify reflects Perplexity’s growing prominence in the AI and search space, as well as its interest in shaping the future of internet infrastructure. While the company is a rising competitor in areas long dominated by Google, it is cautioning against dismantling core products like Chrome, which it views as essential to maintaining a high-quality user experience at scale.

Per Reuters, the DOJ has argued that bold reforms are necessary to hold monopolists accountable. DOJ attorney David Dahlquist told the court Monday, “Now is the time to tell Google and all other monopolists … that there are consequences when you break the antitrust laws.”

Perplexity’s testimony is expected to offer a contrasting perspective—one that supports accountability but warns against remedies that could unintentionally degrade service quality for consumers. By voicing its concerns in court, the company is playing a key role in shaping the debate over how best to rein in Big Tech without compromising innovation or user benefit.

The proceedings come just days after another federal court found Google had also violated antitrust laws in the digital advertising market, compounding the legal challenges facing the company. In that case, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema concluded that Google used its dominance in ad tech to stifle competition and inflate profits.

Source: DeCrypt