Generative AI became a significant focus of Google’s US antitrust trial as the trial’s remedies phase came to a conclusion with closing arguments on Friday, as Google and the US Justice Department presented opposing views for AI’s relevance to general search.

In a 261-page brief filed ahead of closing arguments, the government said generative AI apps should be treated as search access points, a term indicating various means for accessing general search, such as widgets or a digital assistant similar to Apple’s Siri.

As such, the remedies the government is proposing should apply to generative AI, the brief said, arguing that otherwise Google could take over the generative AI field.

Remedies debate

“If remedies do not apply to GenAI apps, Google may be able to exclude GenAI-based general search rivals like it has historically excluded traditional general search rivals,” the Justice Department’s brief said.

It added that AI apps are a “nascent threat” to Google because they are developing general search capabilities.

The government is pushing for Google search data to be made accessible to competitors to help restore competition, and said generative AI competitors should be included in this provision.

Google has been pushing for US District Judge Amit Mehta to impose a narrower remedy that would exclude measures such as selling off the Chrome browser or the Android operating system.

It said in its brief that treating AI apps like search access points would “stifle innovation and preempt competition”.

The company said such a measure would have prohibited it from competing with OpenAI for use within Apple’s AI offerings.

Google said it has already addressed AI competition concerns by reducing the exclusivity of the deals it reaches with companies such as smartphone maker Samsung Electronics.

AI competition

The judge questioned some of the Justice Departments arguments during Friday’s session, saying it seemed out of place to try to bring generative AI into the definition of general search.

Justice Department lawyer Adam Severt replied that it was necessary for the remedies to be forward-looking.

In an earlier filing, AI start-up Anthropic, which is a key Google partner, said a proposed requirement to give the DOJ advance notice of AI investments and partnerships would create a “significant disincentive” for Google to invest in smaller AI companies and would likely mean it would refrain from such investments entirely.

The measure “would harm, not benefit, AI competition”, Anthropic said in the filing.

Google holds a minority stake worth billions of dollars in Anthropic.