OpenAI executive Nick Turley stated Tuesday that the AI company would consider acquiring Google’s Chrome browser if regulators mandate its sale. Turley, who leads product development for ChatGPT, delivered this testimony during the remedies phase of Google’s major search monopoly antitrust trial in Washington D.C. The declaration potentially introduces a well-funded buyer for a core Google asset, hinting at the competitive restructuring that could follow the landmark case targeting Google’s market dominance.
This testimony unfolds as the court considers penalties after U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta determined last August that Google violated antitrust law.
That ruling highlighted Google’s expensive default-placement deals, through which the company reportedly paid partners like Apple approximately $20 billion in 2021 as part of a $26.3 billion total spend that year. The Department of Justice, seeking to “allow that block of ice to thaw,” as DOJ lawyer David Dahlquist stated during Monday’s opening arguments, is pushing for major structural changes, principally forcing Google to sell Chrome.
A Potential Path for OpenAI in Browsers
Explaining OpenAI’s potential interest, Turley suggested an independent Chrome could boost the distribution of its AI tools. “In the world we have today, people may never encounter us, or encounter us once and never find our product again,” he stated, according to Courthouse News Service.
He portrayed Chrome as a potential “onramp” for steering users towards AI assistants as search engine replacements. This interest is further contextualized by Google’s rejection of OpenAI’s July 2024 request to use its search API.
“We believe having multiple partners, and in particular Google’s API, would enable us to provide a better product to users,” OpenAI had told Google, per an email shown at trial, but Turley confirmed, “We have no partnership with Google today.” ChatGPT currently uses Microsoft Bing technology for its search features. Turley also mentioned that ChatGPT remains “years away” from having its own search technology capable of handling most queries, making access to distribution or existing browser infrastructure potentially appealing.
This ambition isn’t entirely out of the blue. Reports from November 2024 suggested OpenAI was exploring building its own AI-centric browser. Adding weight to this, OpenAI hired former key Google Chrome architects Ben Goodger and Darin Fisher around that same time. However, during cross-examination by Google’s lawyers Tuesday, an internal OpenAI document was presented where Turley had seemingly downplayed Google as a major competitor, a point Turley clarified in court was intended for internal motivation.
Google Mounts a Strong Defense
Google’s legal team is fiercely resisting the DOJ’s proposed remedies. Lead attorney John Schmidtlein labeled the divestiture demand “extreme” and “fundamentally flawed”, arguing it was “untethered from the liability findings” and suggesting the “message from the government has been loud and clear: Google should be punished.”
Schmidtlein contended that separating Chrome from the underlying open-source Chromium project—the base code for Chrome and browsers like Microsoft Edge—would be exceptionally complex and potentially harm the web ecosystem. He also questioned the process for evaluating buyers and claimed the remedy could bar Google from the browser market for a decade.
Google insists it achieved success through “hard work and ingenuity” and user preference, asserting rivals “would like handouts as well even though they are competing just fine.” Kent Walker, Google’s President of Global Affairs, previously warned the DOJ’s plan could “endanger the security and privacy of millions of Americans.” Google has proposed alternative, less drastic measures like yearly default deals.
AI Deals Under the Antitrust Spotlight
The trial is concurrently scrutinizing Google’s activities in the AI market, supporting the DOJ’s argument that Google aims to extend its search monopoly using similar tactics. Testimony Tuesday from Google VP Peter Fitzgerald detailed a deal, effective January 2025, where Google provides Samsung “enormous sums of money” monthly plus ad revenue sharing for preinstalling the Gemini AI application.
This parallels the structure of past search default deals Judge Mehta found unlawful, such as the one where Google paid Samsung a reported $8 billion between 2020-2023 for default placements of Search, Assistant, and the Play Store, according to testimony in a separate case.
Details also surfaced of a structurally comparable Gemini deal with Motorola. This intense competition for default AI placement occurs as OpenAI, Microsoft, and Meta have also reportedly courted Samsung.
Fitzgerald acknowledged Motorola was also talking with competitor Perplexity AI, which is developing its own AI-native browser, “Comet.” Fitzgerald stated Google amended its Samsung search agreement in April 2025 to remove exclusivity and noted the Gemini deal permits competing AI installations.
Trial Continues Amid Broader Scrutiny
The DOJ aims to “restore competition to these markets,” arguing that “The antitrust laws are designed to adapt to advances in technology, the oil companies and railroads of yesterday are the internet and search engines of today.”
The remedies trial is expected to conclude by May 9, with Judge Mehta anticipated to deliver a decision by August 2025. Google faces numerous antitrust challenges worldwide, including the recent ruling against its ad tech business, the late 2024 loss to Epic Games over its Android app store, and regulatory actions in Europe and China.
