Google has questioned the motivations of the US Justice Department's top antitrust official in a filing to a district court, arguing that his past clients create an ethical conflict and raise doubts about the government's lawsuit against the tech giant.
Apple executives Eddy Cue, John Giannandrea, and Adrian Perica will testify in an antitrust investigation into Google's alleged abuse of its search engine dominance, despite Apple's argument that it would be burdensome; Apple's multi-billion dollar deal with Google is a key aspect of the case.
Google has reached a settlement in a long-running antitrust case with attorneys general in 36 states and Washington, D.C., over its mobile app store policies, ahead of the expected trial in November.
Google has reached an agreement in principle with US states to settle an antitrust lawsuit over its alleged monopolistic practices in the Google Play Store, which accused the company of inflating prices for paid apps and in-app purchases in the Android app market.
Google previewed its defense against the U.S. government's charges of illegal monopolization, claiming that its distribution agreements do not harm competition and that consumers have the ability to easily change search engine defaults.
Google will face a high-stakes antitrust trial brought by the US government and multiple states, which could have significant implications for the tech giant's dominant search business.
The landmark antitrust trial against Google marks a broader reconsideration of the notion that the internet is inherently open and self-regulating, as regulators seek to prevent dominant technology companies from stifling innovation in emerging fields such as artificial intelligence.
The government's antitrust case against Google, which parallels the landmark case against Microsoft 25 years ago, lacks the same cultural impact despite similar accusations of unfair market dominance.
The trial against Google, initiated by the Department of Justice (DOJ), will test the Biden administration's efforts to rein in the power of tech giants and curb Google's dominance in online search, which could have broad implications for other investigations into companies like Amazon and Apple.
The biggest tech monopoly trial in decades, where the US Department of Justice and state attorneys general will argue that Google violated anti-monopoly law through exclusive agreements, begins on Tuesday.
The US Justice Department argues that Google uses its power to stifle competition and maintain its dominance as the most popular search engine, while Google claims that users rely on them due to the quality of their search engine, in a landmark antitrust case that could test the limits of corporate power in the United States.
Google's antitrust trial against the Department of Justice centers around claims that Microsoft's search tool Bing failed due to lack of investment and innovation, rather than Google's anticompetitive behavior.
The landmark anti-monopoly trial against Google continues with tensions over confidentiality restrictions and accusations of rule violations.
Apple has objected to claims made in an antitrust case against Google, disputing the mention of specific monetary figures regarding payments from Google to Apple to be the default search engine on Apple devices.
The focus of the Google antitrust trial is on the future, as the verdict will establish the rules for tech competition and shape the development of commercialized artificial intelligence and other new technologies.
The US Justice Department questions Verizon executive about pre-installing Google software on mobile phones, as part of antitrust case against Google.
The U.S. Justice Department objects to excluding the public from court discussions on Google's pricing for online advertising, arguing that it is essential information in the antitrust case against the tech giant.
Google has made a final attempt to overturn a €2.42 billion ($2.6 billion) EU antitrust fine for market abuse related to its shopping service, arguing that regulators failed to prove its practices were anti-competitive.
Google allegedly paid billions of dollars to key companies to maintain its search engine as the default on computers and mobile devices, making it difficult for smaller rival DuckDuckGo to grow its market share, according to testimony by DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg at a trial investigating alleged antitrust violations by Google.
The CEO of DuckDuckGo testifies in the antitrust trial against Google, describing the obstacles faced by competitors in effectively competing with the search giant due to its monopoly and deals to make its search engine the default on browsers and platforms.
Apple senior vice president Eddy Cue is expected to testify in court that Apple chose Google as the default search engine on the iPhone because it was the best product and that Apple has revenue-sharing agreements with other search engines, shedding light on Google's licensing agreements and the accusation of monopolizing online search.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified in an antitrust trial that Google's dominant search engine position is due to default deals with smartphone makers, arguing that user choice is "completely bogus" and defaults are the key factor in search behavior.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified in Google's antitrust trial, stating that Microsoft and its search engine Bing cannot compete with Google due to the default search engine deals Google has made with partners like Apple and Samsung, creating a "vicious cycle" for Microsoft.
Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testified against Google in an antitrust case, expressing concerns about Google's dominance in the search space and its potential to become even more pervasive with the integration of artificial intelligence. Meanwhile, the Department of Justice has filed a civil antitrust lawsuit against Google for monopolizing digital advertising technologies and breaching the Sherman Act, with allegations of subverting competition and protecting its monopoly through exclusive deals. These developments echo the Microsoft case from 25 years ago and raise questions about meaningful change in web search and AI-powered features for internet users.
The US Federal Trade Commission is investigating Amazon and Google for alleged monopolistic practices, with Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella testifying against Google's attempts to monopolize the search market by paying to make its search engine the default choice for Apple and Android.
The antitrust case against Google puts the annual payment it makes to Apple for being the default search engine at risk, which constitutes 14-16% of Apple's profits, but Bernstein analysts believe Apple has options to mitigate the potential impact, such as partnering with another search engine or launching its own.
Apple's long-standing and lucrative agreement with Google to have it as the default search engine on Safari across its products has prevented Apple from developing its own search product and solidifies Google's dominance in the search industry, according to evidence presented in the US v. Google antitrust trial.
Google pays Apple between $18 and $20 billion per year to be the default search engine on iPhones, representing roughly 15% of Apple's annual operating profits, and there is a possibility that federal courts could force Google to terminate its search deal with Apple as part of the Department of Justice's antitrust lawsuit against Google.
Multiple government legal actions, including antitrust suits by the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, are targeting Silicon Valley giants like Google, Facebook, and Amazon over allegations of monopolistic practices and exploitation of independent sellers, with Amazon potentially facing real penalties for its control over the marketplace.
Google could be paying Apple between $18 billion to $20 billion a year to maintain its status as the dominant search engine on the iPhone, potentially generating 14-16% of Apple's annual operating profits, but this agreement may be at risk due to an ongoing antitrust suit.
If regulators win the antitrust trial against Google, it could lead to significant changes that diminish the dominance of the search engine and open up new avenues for competition and consumer choice in online services.
