Google contract prevented Motorola from setting Perplexity as default assistant

https://archive.ph/tAGxc

Did anyone read this article? The headline is misleading.

It clearly states in the first line:

> "Google’s contract with Lenovo Group Ltd.’s Motorola blocked the smartphone maker from setting Perplexity AI as the default assistant on its new devices"

They didn't block Perplexity AI from Motorola's devices, the agreement states that they allow them to preload the devices with Perplexity, but the agreement, that both parties signed, does not give Motorola the permission to set it as the default.

> "Motorola “can’t get out of their Google obligations and so they are unable to change the default assistant on the device.”

They signed the agreement, and now are going to courts to claim they had no choice.

I understand the premise, that they think they had no choice, but this article is misleading in its headline, and plenty of the comments here clearly show that a lot of "readers" didn't bother to read it.

It continues to baffle me that Google gets harassed by the courts for being a better actor in almost every area it participates.

Open source Android vs. closed iOS

Install apps from any source on Android vs. total restriction on iOS

Switch default app for browser (and many other things!) vs. No choice but Safari tech on iOS

Easy switch of search provider in Chrome vs. countless dark patterns pushing Edge and Bing on Windows

I might be missing something big here, but how does the consistency work in these scenarios? At one place, you are saying Google is not allowed to pay to be default, but at the same time you are allowing others to be default because they are not a monopoly. One would naively assume that rules should be consistent. I get that asking people to choose induces friction and yet people would gravitate towards the most popular option. But, giving the default to an objectively inferior product (not talking about perplexity, but you would agree bing/DDG is not on the same level as Google for most non tech users) is worse when it comes to user experience and increases the friction even more.

I bet lots of people on /r/Android cheered when provisions like this were first added. How long did we spend complaining about dumb junk like Bixby?

Of course, users should have a choice.

Everyone's trying to fight for a piece of the AI walled-garden pie. I guess it's only getting divided up between a few players all over again. Nice try Perplexity, and I do see it as forewarning for the power play OpenAI will attempt (we just don't know what it will be yet).

What would be stopping them from including a slip of paper, sticker, or setup step asking the user to change the default?

I wonder how the relationship is after Google sold Motorola to Lenovo in October 2014.

Perplexity setting up talks with phone makers is itself an anti-competitive behavior to curb an already anti-competitive behavior. Either this should be banned in entirety or let the free markets prevail.

Why wouldn't they?

1. Already in anti-trust related to ads, AI is probably in the clear.

2. If they are thought to violating a law they will get like a $10,000,000 fine and pay it, still less money than they will make from harvesting data.

I seriously didn't realize Motorola was still a player in the phone market

"Google Tries To Be Microsoft, According To Witness"

Someone at Google should sic an llm at the trove of documents from the Microsoft antitrust trial. This is directly from the 90s Microsoft playbook. I'm sure I'm by far not the only one with a sufficient attention span to remember that.

[dead]

"Google blocked phone-making also-ran from preinstalling crapware their own users don't want, doing them a big favor."

Google/Alphabet's corporate death penalty (forced dissolution by the state) cannot come quickly enough.

Live by the sword (secretly cooperate with state-run intelligence agencies against the interests of their own users), die by the sword (swift and merciless forced corporate dissolution, by the state).