Famed startup accelerator Y Combinator has taken a firm stance against Google in an amicus brief submitted in the U.S. government’s antitrust case against the tech giant. YC labeled Google a “monopolist” that has hindered innovation in the startup ecosystem by creating a “kill zone” that discourages venture funding in areas like web search and AI.
According to YC, Google’s dominance has “chilled” efforts from firms like itself to back startups that might otherwise compete with the search leader. This, YC argues, has led to a stagnated and artificially constrained tech landscape. The organization is currently supporting AI-driven startups building tools for question answering and intelligent agents, but fears Google may use its monopoly power to suppress growth in those markets too.
YC criticized Google’s decade-long stranglehold on the search and text advertising markets and called for an end to anti-competitive behaviors like paying Apple billions to remain Safari’s default search engine. It also urged Google to open its search index for use by other AI companies training language models.
While not demanding a breakup, YC proposed a five-year timeline for Google to change its practices, warning that failure could result in government-enforced divestiture. CEO Garry Tan described this as a “spinoff hammer” threat but emphasized that YC supports both big tech and smaller innovators.
Interestingly, YC’s criticism comes despite close ties with Google. Google Cloud recently partnered with YC to provide startups access to Nvidia GPUs, and Google has acquired or invested in several YC startups over the years. Still, YC’s historical connection to OpenAI, now a direct Google competitor, is also worth noting. OpenAI was born out of YC Research and led by former YC president Sam Altman.
Critics argue YC’s proposed remedies might benefit OpenAI more than early-stage startups. Sheel Mohnot, a VC at Better Tomorrow Ventures, questioned the narrative, saying the brief overstates Google’s power.
Both Google and YC declined to comment further on the matter. Google has previously defended itself by saying the DOJ’s proposed remedies would hurt consumers and stifle innovation.
