Operation Chrome: AI companies battle for browser as DOJ forces Google’s $34.5B divestiture

The Department of Justice’s antitrust case against Google has created an unexpected opportunity in the tech world: the potential forced sale of Chrome, the world’s most popular web browser. With over 60% of the global browser market, Chrome represents far more than just a way to surf the internet—it’s a strategic gateway that controls how billions of people access information online.

Now AI companies are circling, recognizing that owning a browser could provide unprecedented access to user data and behavior patterns that are crucial for training advanced AI systems. The stakes are enormous, and the implications stretch far beyond typical corporate acquisitions.

1. The antitrust pressure forcing Google’s hand

Google never intended to sell Chrome. The browser, launched in 2008, was designed as a defensive strategy to ensure the company maintained control over how people access the internet and, by extension, Google’s search engine.

However, a US district court ruled that Google violated antitrust laws by monopolizing online digital advertising, creating a situation where the Department of Justice’s antitrust division suggested Chrome’s divestiture as a potential remedy. This isn’t about Google wanting to sell—it’s about regulators forcing the company to break up its integrated ecosystem.

“Google Chrome isn’t for sale,” explains Thomas Randall, an analyst at Info-Tech Research Group, a technology research firm. The software powering Chrome is open-source, but Google owns the brand and the crucial default pathways that funnel users into its services.

The regulatory scrutiny extends beyond US borders. Antitrust regulators in the European Union and other jurisdictions would likely block any sale to another tech giant, particularly companies already dominant in AI or digital advertising. This creates a narrow window of potential buyers who could both afford Chrome and survive regulatory approval.

2. Perplexity’s audacious $34.5 billion bid

Perplexity, an AI-powered search company valued at $14 billion, made headlines with its $34.5 billion offer to acquire Chrome. The timing wasn’t coincidental—the bid came shortly after Perplexity launched Comet, its own AI-integrated web browser designed to compete directly with traditional browsing experiences.

The apparent contradiction raises an obvious question: why would Perplexity want to buy Chrome if it just launched its own browser?

“Oh, because of distribution,” explains Nick Davidov, co-founder of Davidovs Venture Collective and an early Perplexity investor. “Instead of having to get all of the users to switch, they will just have them.”

This strategy reflects a fundamental challenge in the browser market: user migration. People rarely switch browsers unless given compelling reasons, and even then, the process involves transferring bookmarks, passwords, and browsing habits. Acquiring Chrome would instantly provide Perplexity with 3 billion active users.

Perplexity’s browser, Comet, was built on technology from Sidekick, a company that created what’s called a “headless browser”—software that can extract information from websites without displaying them visually to users. This capability is particularly valuable for AI companies that need to process web content at scale.

3. The valuation debate: bargain or bankruptcy price?

Perplexity’s $34.5 billion offer has sparked intense debate about Chrome’s true worth. For context, Microsoft acquired LinkedIn for $26.2 billion in 2016, and LinkedIn had significantly fewer active users than Chrome’s estimated 3 billion.

Jad Tarifi, founder of Google’s Generative AI team who now heads Integral AI, an AI agent development startup, views the offer as potentially reasonable. “The acquisition cost of the attention of someone is higher than $10, so purely based on that, [buying Chrome at that price] makes sense,” he explains, noting that the bid values each user’s attention at roughly $10.

However, privacy expert Mark Weinstein considers $34.5 billion drastically undervalued, suggesting $340 billion would be more accurate. He describes Perplexity’s offer as “a bankruptcy price,” emphasizing the enormous value of user data that would transfer with Chrome ownership.

The discrepancy highlights different perspectives on what makes Chrome valuable. Beyond user numbers, Chrome provides access to browsing patterns, search behaviors, and real-time user preferences—data that becomes increasingly valuable for training AI systems.

4. Why AI companies covet browser ownership

Owning a browser offers AI companies several strategic advantages that extend far beyond traditional web browsing. Chris Ferris, senior vice president at Pierpont Communications, a strategic communications firm, notes that Google’s success stemmed partly from integrating search directly into Chrome’s address bar, effectively turning every URL entry into a potential search query.

For AI companies, this integration could be even more powerful. The address bar could function as an AI query interface, allowing users to ask questions or request tasks directly rather than navigating to specific websites.

Andrew Gamino-Cheong, co-founder of Trustible, an AI compliance platform, identifies three primary motivations for AI companies seeking browser ownership:

Enhanced AI agent integration: Users already signed into their accounts through the browser could seamlessly interact with AI agents without repeatedly providing credentials or context.

Circumventing anti-scraping mechanisms: Many websites use tools like CAPTCHA challenges (“Are you a human?”) to prevent automated data collection. A browser owner could potentially bypass these restrictions more easily.

Content authenticity detection: Browsers can observe the entire content creation process, making it possible to distinguish between human-written and AI-generated text—crucial information as AI-generated content proliferates online.

This last point addresses a growing concern in AI development. When AI models are trained on too much AI-generated content, they can experience “model collapse,” where the system’s performance degrades significantly. Browser ownership would provide companies with verified human-generated content for training purposes.

5. The data goldmine and privacy implications

The real value in Chrome ownership lies in unprecedented access to user behavior data. Unlike traditional advertising models that rely on aggregated statistics, AI companies need raw content and detailed interaction patterns to train their systems effectively.

Gamino-Cheong predicts that Chrome’s data value will drive new privacy legislation: “It’s not just statistics about user behavior that’s good for ads. It’s the raw content itself that’s now the important part. Companies are getting more aggressive in their desire to collect and use that directly.”

This shift creates potential intellectual property concerns. If users create original content within their browsers—artwork, writing, or proprietary business documents—an AI-powered browser could theoretically observe and potentially use this information for training without explicit consent.

Weinstein warns that AI companies are particularly incentivized to monetize gathered data through AI search capabilities. While algorithms have long collected user information, AI systems can analyze this data instantaneously and extract insights at unprecedented scale and speed.

6. User benefits and security considerations

Despite privacy concerns, AI-powered browsers could offer significant user advantages. Gamino-Cheong sees potential for smoother AI agent interactions, recalling his experience testing ChatGPT’s agent mode, which required him to manually log into various accounts—a security risk that made him uncomfortable sharing passwords.

An AI browser that maintains persistent logins could offer enhanced security, particularly if the AI processing occurred locally on users’ devices rather than on remote servers. This approach would provide AI capabilities while maintaining greater control over personal data.

Davidov envisions AI browsers enabling internet personalization at scale, implementing user preferences across all websites and filtering searches for products or services tailored to individual needs. Rather than replacing browsers, AI would enhance them to create more customized online experiences.

7. The future of browsing in an AI world

The browser acquisition race raises fundamental questions about the future of web interaction. As AI chatbots like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Claude reduce reliance on traditional Google searches, translation tools, and other web-based services, will browsers become obsolete?

Tarifi believes browsers will evolve rather than disappear, predicting dynamically generated interfaces: “If you think of text-based chat, like ChatGPT now as MS-DOS, there’s going to be a new move in the next few years, from MS-DOS to Windows. From a purely text-based chatbot to fully multimodal, immersive operating system interfaces generated on the fly.”

In this vision, browsers would become more like operating systems—essential infrastructure that users rarely interact with directly. Instead, AI systems would handle the underlying web interactions while presenting users with customized interfaces tailored to specific tasks.

Gamino-Cheong anticipates a future where users log into a single AI system that manages all their digital tasks, with browsers operating behind the scenes much like current operating systems do.

8. Google’s strategic dilemma

Google faces what Tarifi describes as a “classical business dilemma.” The company possesses world-class AI talent and technology but relies on a business model built around directing users to sponsored links—exactly what AI-powered search summaries eliminate.

“They’re stuck between this rock and a hard place,” Tarifi explains. Generative AI that provides direct answers rather than link lists threatens Google’s core advertising revenue, creating tension between innovation and profitability.

This constraint may prevent Google from fully utilizing Chrome’s potential. While the company could integrate more sophisticated AI features, doing so might cannibalize its primary revenue source.

Meanwhile, younger AI-first companies like Perplexity operate without this legacy burden, potentially positioning them to reinvent browsing experiences more aggressively. Whether Google can navigate this transition while maintaining Chrome—or whether regulatory pressure will force divestiture—remains the critical question shaping the browser market’s future.

The Chrome acquisition battle represents more than corporate maneuvering; it’s a preview of how AI companies will compete for control over digital infrastructure that shapes billions of daily interactions with information and services online.