Shares of the company fell around 3.6% in premarket trading on Friday
"We understand there will be heavy battles and that the enemy is preparing for that," the head of the Ukrainian armed forces wrote in a statement on the Telegram app
Google on Thursday asked that a judge, rather than a jury, decide whether it violated U.S. antitrust laws by building a monopoly on the technology that powers online advertising. To bolster its case, the tech giant wrote a multimillion-dollar check to the U.S. government that it says renders moot the government's best argument for demanding a jury trial. The antitrust case set to go before a jury in Alexandria, Virginia, in September is one of two major lawsuits the Justice Department has brought against Google. While the Virginia case focuses on advertising technology, an ongoing case in the District of Columbia focuses on Google's dominance as a search engine. Both sides in the D.C. case have presented evidence and made closing arguments. A judge there will decide whether Google violated the law. Google wants a judge to decide the merits of the case in Virginia, as well. The company argues in court papers filed Thursday that it's unprecedented for a jury to decide a federal ...
That action would be an unprecedented move by Congress to use legislation to threaten the ban of a large consumer technology platform
The European Commission has been investigating Microsoft's tying of Office and Teams since a 2020 complaint by Salesforce-owned competing workspace messaging app Slack
The antitrust settlement announced on Tuesday is one of the largest in U.S. history. If approved by court, it would resolve most claims in a nationwide litigation that began nearly two decades ago
The Justice Department on Thursday announced a sweeping antitrust lawsuit against Apple, accusing the tech giant of engineering an illegal monopoly in smartphones that boxes out competitors, stifles innovation and keeps prices artificially high. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in New Jersey, alleges that Apple has monopoly power in the smartphone market and leverages control over the iPhone to engage in a broad, sustained, and illegal course of conduct. Apple has locked its consumers into the iPhone while locking its competitors out of the market, said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. Stalling the advancement of the very market it revolutionised, she said, it has "smothered an entire industry. Apple called the lawsuit wrong on the facts and the law and said it will vigorously defend against it. The sweeping action takes aim at how Apple molds its technology and business relationships to extract more money from consumers, developers, content creators, artists, publishers, sm
The Justice Department on Thursday announced a sweeping antitrust lawsuit against Apple, accusing the tech giant of engineering an illegal monopoly in smartphones that boxes out competitors and stifles innovation. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in New Jersey, alleges that Apple has monopoly power in the smartphone market and uses its control over the iPhone to engage in a broad, sustained, and illegal course of conduct. The lawsuit which was also filed with 16 state attorneys general is the latest example of the Justice Department's approach to aggressive enforcement of federal antitrust law that officials say is aimed at ensuring a fair and competitive market, even as it has lost some significant anticompetition cases. President Joe Biden has called for the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission to vigorously enforce antitrust statutes. The increased policing of corporate mergers and business deals has been met with resistance from some business leaders who have
Apple's App Store, which charges developers a commission of either 15% or 30%, has come under heavy criticism by developers and lawmakers
Both Apple and Fortnite maker Epic Games Inc. had asked the court to hear an appeal related to the case. The justices turned down the appeals without explanation
Epic largely lost a similar challenge to Apple Inc.'s app store two years ago and both companies have asked the US Supreme Court to review their dispute
A federal court jury is poised begin its deliberations in an antitrust trial focused on whether Google's efforts to profit from its app store for Android smartphones have been illegally gouging consumers and stifling innovation. Before the nine-person jury in San Francisco starts weighing the evidence on Monday, the lawyers on the opposing sides of the trial will present their closing arguments in a three-year-old case filed by Epic Games, the maker of the popular Fortnite video game. The four-week trial included testimony from both Google CEO Sundar Pichai, who sometimes seemed like a professor explaining complex topics while standing behind a lectern because of a health issue, and Epic CEO Tim Sweeney, who painted himself as a video game lover on a mission to take down a greedy tech titan. Epic alleged that Google has been exploiting its wealth and control of the Android software that powers most of the world's smartphones to protect a lucrative payment system within its Play Stor
The FTC alleges that Amazon's increased use of ads boosts profits while it harms sellers and consumers, making it harder for shoppers to find products they are searching for
Testifying in the biggest US antitrust case in a quarter century, Google CEO Sundar Pichai defended his company's practice of paying Apple and other tech companies to make Google the default search engine on their devices, saying the intent was to make the user experience seamless and easy". The Department of Justice contends that Google a company whose very name is synonymous with scouring the internet pays off tech companies to lock out rival search engines to smother competition and innovation. The payments came to more than $26 billion in 2021, according to court documents the government entered into the record last week. Google counters that it dominates the market because its search engine is better than the competition. Pichai, the star witness in Google's defence, testified Monday that Google's payments to phone manufacturers and wireless phone companies were partly meant to nudge them into making costly security upgrades and other improvements to their devices, not just t
If government regulators prevail against Google in the biggest US antitrust trial in a quarter century, it's likely to unleash drastic changes that will undermine the dominance of a search engine that defines the internet for billions of people. As the 10-week trial probing Google's business practices nears its midway point, it's still too early to tell if US District Judge Amit Mehta will side with the Justice Department and try to handcuff one of the world's most dominant tech companies. If Mehta rules that Google has been running an illegal monopoly in search, the punishment could open up new online avenues for consumers and businesses to explore in pursuit of information, entertainment and commerce. The judge can compel Google to open the floodgates so more startups and third-party competitors can put greater competitive pressure on Google, which will create higher quality online services, said Luther Lowe, senior vice president of public policy at Yelp. The online business rev
Google's advertising auctions require the winner to pay only a penny more than the runner-up
company frequently makes changes to the auctions it uses to sell search ads - the text and shopping promotions that appear at the top of a results page, said Jerry Dischler, VP for Google ad products
Google case will be vital for competition laws
"Search engine defaults generate a sizable and robust bias towards the default," Rangel said. "Defaults have a powerful impact on consumer decisions"
The US Justice Department pressed ahead with its antitrust case against Google on Wednesday, questioning a former employee of the search engine giant about deals he helped negotiate with phone companies in the 2000s. Chris Barton, who worked for Google from 2004 to 2011, testified that he made it a priority to negotiate for Google to be the default search engine on mobile devices. In exchange, phone service providers or manufacturers were offered a share of revenue generated when users clicked on ads. In the biggest antitrust case in a quarter century, the government is arguing that Google has rigged the market in its favour by locking in its search engine as the one users see first on their devices, shutting out competition and smothering innovation. Google counters that it dominates the internet search market because its product is better than the competition. Even when it holds the default spot on smartphones and other devices, it argues, users can switch to rival search engines