WebProNews

Tag: Antitrust

  • Antitrust Bill Would Prevent Apple From Preinstalling Its Own Apps

    Antitrust Bill Would Prevent Apple From Preinstalling Its Own Apps

    A bill introduced by the US House would prohibit Apple and Google from preinstalling their own apps, in an effort to reign in Big Tech.

    Regulators are looking with increased scrutiny at Big Tech and trying to introduce measures to curb their power and influence. As part of a group of five bills, one in particular would place strict limits on so-called “first-party” apps — those that come preinstalled on a device or platform.

    If the bill becomes law, companies like Apple would be prohibited from installing their own software on devices, such as the iPhone and iPad, and instead simply make them available for download. This would, in theory, put the company’s apps on the same footing as third-party options.

    “It would be equally easy to download the other five apps as the Apple one so they’re not using their market dominance to favor their own products and services,” said Representative David Cicilline, according to Bloomberg.

    As with most solutions, it’s far from a perfect outcome. For example, this writer specifically uses Apple products and software, as opposed to Google’s, because of the superior privacy and integration Apple’s apps offer. If I wanted to use Google’s apps…I would purchase an Android phone, and I suspect many Android users feel the same way in reverse.

    For users like us, the added step will be an unwelcome inconvenience.

  • D.C. AG Launches Antitrust Suit Against Amazon

    D.C. AG Launches Antitrust Suit Against Amazon

     

    Washington, D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Amazon for anticompetitive practices and price-fixing.

    Amazon has increasingly been under fire on all fronts. The company has repeatedly been criticized for how it treats employees, as well as its attempts to combat unionization efforts.

    Now the company is under fire for alleged anticompetitive behavior, including wide-scale price-fixing. At the heart of the case is the company’s “most favored nation” (MFN) agreements, which prohibit retailers from offering their products elsewhere at cheaper prices, or with better terms, than they do on Amazon. The MFN agreements even prohibit retailers from offering their products cheaper on their own websites.

    “Amazon has used its dominant position in the online retail market to win at all costs. It maximizes its profits at the expense of third-party sellers and consumers while harming competition, stifling innovation, and illegally tilting the playing field in its favor,” said AG Racine. “We filed this antitrust lawsuit to put an end to Amazon’s illegal control of prices across the online retail market. We need a fair online marketplace that expands options available to District residents and promotes competition, innovation, and choice.”

    According to the AG, Amazon claimed to have removed its price parity policy in 2019. In actuality, the company is accused of quickly and quietly replacing it with a replacement policy that accomplished the same thing. Under the new policy, the Fair Pricing Policy, “third-party sellers can be sanctioned or removed from Amazon altogether if they offer their products for lower prices or under better terms on a competing online platform.”

    https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20788384/amazon-complaint-.pdf

  • Daily Mail Newspaper Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Google

    Daily Mail Newspaper Files Antitrust Lawsuit Against Google

    The Daily Mail has filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google, claiming the search giant wields too much advertising power and newspapers see little in return.

    As Google has grown from a search engine to an advertising behemoth, it has exerted an increasing level of control over the entire advertising process. The company now controls the ad exchange, ad space on publishers pages and the inventory of available ads.

    According to Reuters, The Daily Mail has had enough and is suing Google.

    “The lack of competition for publishers’ inventory depresses prices and reduces the amount and quality of news available to readers, but Google ends up ahead because it controls a growing share of the ad space that remains,” the lawsuit said.

    The lawsuit adds to a growing list of suits Google is facing, including one by the Department of Justice, as well as one by a coalition of states.

  • Senator Josh Hawley’s Antitrust Bill Would Hurt Startups More Than Big Tech

    Senator Josh Hawley’s Antitrust Bill Would Hurt Startups More Than Big Tech

    Senator Josh Hawley introduced a bill Monday aimed at addressing antitrust concerns, but it may do more harm than good.

    Antitrust has become a major concern for politicians on both sides of the aisle. Google and Facebook are both facing antitrust lawsuits, and officials are looking at various ways of addressing the overarching concerns about the tech industry in general.

    Senator Hawley’s bill would ban companies with a market cap over $100 billion from buying any startups. As Business Insider columnist Jason Aten writes, however, such a move would harm startups far more than it would hurt Big Tech.

    Acquisition is one of the main goals of many startup founders, providing an exit strategy and payday for successful founders and investors. For better or worse, large companies are an important part of that strategy. If they are blocked from acquiring companies, it could completely disrupt the startup scene.

    Another major downside is the disparity between large and small companies that may be over $100 billion. Aten uses the example of Shopify, a company large enough to fall under Hawley’s bill. Shopify would be prohibited from buying an up-and-coming app, service or platform that could help it better compete with much larger rivals, such as Amazon or Walmart. Such an outcome would only hurt Shopify, while protecting the larger company even more.

    Aten’s take on the situation well-illustrates the challenges of addressing antitrust issues without creating even more problems.

  • FTC Abandons Qualcomm Antitrust Case

    FTC Abandons Qualcomm Antitrust Case

    The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has abandoned its antitrust case against Qualcomm, despite believing the company is guilty.

    Qualcomm has faced long-standing accusations of antitrust behavior, leading to multiple lawsuits. Apple famously engaged in a years-long court battle, before ultimately settling with the company. IBM similarly tried to enter the cellular modem market, before ultimately selling its modem business to Apple, citing what it believed was unfair competition from Qualcomm.

    In the initial court ruling, the FTC prevailed in its case, only to have that decision reversed on appeal. The FTC was originally planning on pursuing the case before the Supreme Court, but has now dropped it.

    “Given the significant headwinds facing the Commission in this matter, the FTC will not petition the Supreme Court to review the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in FTC v. Qualcomm,” said Acting Chairwoman Rebecca Kelly Slaughter. “The FTC’s staff did an exceptional job presenting the case, and I continue to believe that the district court’s conclusion that Qualcomm violated the antitrust laws was entirely correct and that the court of appeals erred in concluding otherwise. Now more than ever, the FTC and other law enforcement agencies need to boldly enforce the antitrust laws to guard against abusive behavior by dominant firms, including in high-technology markets and those that involve intellectual property. I am particularly concerned about the potential for anticompetitive or unfair behavior in the context of standard setting and the FTC will closely monitor conduct in this arena.”

    The announcement is good news for Qualcomm and bad news for its competitors, many of whose will face an uphill battle competing against it.

  • Tim Wu, the Man Who Coined ‘Net Neutrality,’ Joins Biden Administration

    Tim Wu, the Man Who Coined ‘Net Neutrality,’ Joins Biden Administration

    Tim Wu is joining the Biden administration, likely signaling increased scrutiny for Big Tech.

    Tim Wu, a Columbia law professor, famously coined the phrase “net neutrality” and has been a vocal critic of the tech industry. Wu has also been a proponent of more aggressive antitrust action against Amazon, Facebook and Google.

    He has been hired by the Biden administration specifically to work on Technology and Competition Policy.

    https://twitter.com/superwuster/status/1367814526159253506?s=20

    Big Tech has been in the spotlight more and more over antitrust concerns. While ominous, Wu’s appointment isn’t necessarily a bad thing for tech companies. Steve Ballmer, former Microsoft CEO, said Big Tech should take a more proactive approach, embrace additional regulation and move forward with clear guidelines it can operate within.

    “If I’m in these guys’ shoes, I say, come on, let’s get down there and let’s regulate me and let’s get it over with so I know what I can do,” Ballmer said in a “Squawk Box” interview.

    “I’ll bet money that they will not be broken up,” Ballmer continued in his comments to CNBC.

    “I also don’t think the case of Apple is the same as Google is the same as Amazon,” Ballmer added. “In a sense putting them all together makes good theater but it doesn’t necessarily mean good policy.”

  • Google Closes Fitbit Deal

    Google Closes Fitbit Deal

    Google has closed its Fitbit deal, despite investigations and concerns over potential privacy and antitrust implications.

    Google announced in November 2019 that it had entered an agreement to acquire Fitbit. Immediately, the company worked to assuage potential privacy concerns over the data Fitbit has access to. The acquisition was largely seen in the context of Google’s desire to use Fitbit to better compete with the Apple Watch.

    Despite Google’s assurances, the Department of Justice and EU regulators investigated the potential acquisition, leading Google to make additional concessions to ensure the deal went forward. It appears the concessions Google made paid off, as the two companies have now closed their deal.

    James Park, Fitbit’s CEO, president, and co-founder, relayed the news in a blog post:

    I’m writing today to let you know that Fitbit is now officially part of Google. It’s an incredibly exciting moment for us as a company and for our Fitbit community of users around the globe.

    Park also tried to reassure users their privacy and data would be respected:

    The trust of our users will continue to be paramount, and we will maintain strong data privacy and security protections, giving you control of your data and staying transparent about what we collect and why. Google will continue to protect Fitbit users’ privacy and has made a series of binding commitments with global regulators, confirming that Fitbit users’ health and wellness data won’t be used for Google ads and this data will be kept separate from other Google ad data. Google also affirmed it will continue to allow Fitbit users to choose to connect to third party services. That means you’ll still be able to connect your favorite health and wellness apps to your Fitbit account. These and other commitments by Google reinforce why Google is an ideal partner for Fitbit who will continue to put our users first and help further our mission to make everyone in the world healthier.

  • Visa Ends Plaid Takeover Bid Amid DOJ Suit

    Visa Ends Plaid Takeover Bid Amid DOJ Suit

    Visa is abandoning its plans to acquire Plaid after the Department of Justice (DOJ) sued over antitrust concerns.

    Visa announced in January 2020 its plans to purchase Plaid. While the smaller company is primarily known for a service that allows users to connect their bank accounts to various finance apps, the company was working on a service that would directly compete with Visa’s core business.

    As a result, Visa’s move to purchase Plaid, to the tune of $5.3 billion, was widely seen as an attempt to stamp out a competitive threat from a smaller rival. The DOJ was concerned by that, especially given Visa’s dominance in its market, prompting it to file a lawsuit.

    According to CNBC, Visa has ended its takeover attempt, a decision the DOJ has hailed as “a victory for American consumers and small businesses.”

  • Oracle Behind Spate of Google Antitrust Lawsuits

    Oracle Behind Spate of Google Antitrust Lawsuits

    Google is under siege as it faces multiple lawsuits from the DOJ and coalitions of states, a situation it may have Oracle to thank for.

    Oracle and Google have been locked in a legal battle since the former bought Sun Microsystems and the Java platform. When Google developed its Android mobile operating systems (OS), it intentionally made Android compatible with the Java libraries.

    Google made the decision in an effort to jumpstart Android’s popularity by piggybacking on one of the most popular programming languages in history. The thinking was that programmers would welcome using a programming language they were already proficient in, as opposed to developing for the iPhone which required learning Objective-C, a language rarely used outside of Apple’s ecosystem.

    At the time, the move was met with enthusiasm, including from Sun Microsystems. CEO Jonathan Schwartz even offered his personal congratulations:

    “I just wanted to add my voice to the chorus of others from Sun in offering my heartfelt congratulations to Google on the announcement of their new Java/Linux phone platform, Android. Congratulations!

    Once Oracle purchased Sun Microsystems three years later, in 2010, the tune immediately changed. Oracle sued Google for infringing on Java copyrights the company now controlled. The case has continued for the past decade, with both sides chalking up victories, and ultimately leading to arguments before the Supreme Court in October. The ramifications of the case could have far-reaching consequences for the software and tech industry.

    It appears, however, that Oracle is simultaneously fighting a completely different battle with Google, helping push regulators toward the current antirust cases.

    According to Bloomberg, Oracle sent officials in at least twelve of the states currently suing Google a “black box” presentation that outlined Google’s data privacy practices. Specifically, the presentation showed how Google tracked users’ data, including their location, even when the users’ Android phones were not being used.

    Ken Glueck, Oracle’s top Washington lobbyist and the man behind the antitrust campaign against Google, was thrilled with the action the states were taking.

    “I couldn’t be happier,” said Glueck told Bloomberg. “As far as I can tell, there are more states suing Google than there are states.”

    Obviously, any campaign on Oracle’s part was not the sole motivating factor. Google was already under investigation by some individual states, and the company had been under fire for years over its privacy and monopoly practices. Many believed a major lawsuit was inevitable.

    Nonetheless, it’s clear that regulators and investigators had an ally in Oracle, and the company may have provided just the push some of those regulators and investigators needed to move forward.

  • States Sue Google For Antitrust Violations

    States Sue Google For Antitrust Violations

    As predicted, a coalition of 10 states have sued Google for alleged monopolistic behavior in digital advertising.

    The DOJ filed a lawsuit against Google in October, accusing the company of abusing its monopoly in the search business. Shortly after, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton warned that state lawsuits would likely follow.

    The first of those lawsuits has now been filed, according to NPR, with 10 states accusing the search giant of similarly abusing its monopoly in online advertising. The states involved are Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas and Utah.

    “These actions harm every person in America,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a video announcing the lawsuit. “If the free market were a baseball game, Google positioned itself as the pitcher, the batter and the umpire.”

    Google has said the claims are “meritless” and vowed to vigorously defend itself in court.

  • Facebook Sued by FTC and 48 US Jurisdictions In Antitrust Case

    Facebook Sued by FTC and 48 US Jurisdictions In Antitrust Case

    As expected, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), along with a coalition of US jurisdictions, has sued Facebook over antitrust accusations.

    Facebook has been under increasing scrutiny for its habit of buying up smaller competitors in an effort to head off potential threats. Among its most high-profile acquisition were Instagram and WhatsApp. Instagram, in particular, was a major threat to Facebook, as it quickly gained a following and posed a threat to Facebook’s dominance.

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed antitrust charges against Google in October, leading many to believe a case against Facebook would soon follow. The FTC, along with 46 states, the District of Columbia and Guam, has filed charges.

    “Personal social networking is central to the lives of millions of Americans,” said Ian Conner, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “Facebook’s actions to entrench and maintain its monopoly deny consumers the benefits of competition. Our aim is to roll back Facebook’s anticompetitive conduct and restore competition so that innovation and free competition can thrive.”

    The complaint hinges on two main areas: anticompetitive acquisitions and anticompetitive platform conduct. Instagram and WhatsApp are examples of Facebook buying platforms and companies it perceived as a threat and was struggling to compete against. Facebook, meanwhile, has maintained that its acquisition of these services helped them grow into the successful platforms they currently are.

    Anticompetitive platform conduct involves accusations that Facebook restricts third-party access to certain APIs unless companies agree not to create competing services. Facebook has even taken measures to cut off competitors’ access to such APIs if they developed services Facebook deemed a threat. For example, when Twitter rolled out its Vine video sharing service, Facebook prevented Vine users from being able to access their Facebook friends.

    The specific jurisdictions involved in the case are Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Florida, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

  • Google’s Problems Worsen: State Lawsuits May Be Coming In Weeks

    Google’s Problems Worsen: State Lawsuits May Be Coming In Weeks

    Google’s antitrust issues are on the verge of getting much worse, as Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton warns state lawsuits may be coming.

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google in October, after an extensive investigation into the company’s business and practices. Even then, some of the veteran DOJ lawyers wanted additional time to make their case before filing, but Attorney General (AG) William Barr pushed head with the case.

    At the heart of the case is Google’s dominance of the search industry, where the company currently controls roughly 90% of the US market. This has made it difficult for other search engines, such as Microsoft Bing and DuckDuckGo, to compete on even terms. Google’s deals with device manufactures, such as Apple, to make their search engine the default only serve to strengthen its position and make it even harder for smaller companies to compete.

    It appears a number of states are set to file their own lawsuits. According to Bloomberg, Texas AG Paxton said state lawsuits could be filed “in the upcoming weeks and months.”

  • Professor Scott Galloway: Amazon May Spin Off AWS

    Professor Scott Galloway: Amazon May Spin Off AWS

    Amid increased antitrust scrutiny, at least one expert is predicting Jeff Bezos and Amazon may spin off AWS.

    AWS is currently the dominant cloud provider, with 31% of the cloud computing market. At the same time, Amazon is a major force in the e-commerce market, and several of its acquisitions have helped it became a significant player in other industries. Whole Foods, Ring and Twitch are just a few of the acquisitions that have made Amazon a powerhouse far beyond its original form.

    The company’s expansion into other markets has drawn the attention of the government, as it looks closely at Big Tech in general. While the current scrutiny has come under a Republican administration, Democrats traditionally come down even harder on big business, raising the stakes with an incoming Biden/Harris administration.

    Scott Galloway, Professor of Marketing, NYU Stern School of Business, spoke with CNN’s Michael Smerconish about the antitrust challenges facing tech companies.

    “It’s a real concern for all of them. There’s already a case against Google, which I think the Biden/Harris administration will pick up. The shadow of the Biden/Harris administration has already resulted in more change at Facebook and Twitter than we’ve seen in a long time. [They’ve] made huge efforts to try and stop the spread of misinformation around the COVID-19. And I would argue that it’s tantamount to teens who have held a great party and their parents are coming home, and they’re trying to clean up their act.”

    Professor Galloway then spoke specifically about the lengths Amazon may go to avoid antitrust issues.

    “As it relates to Amazon, it will be Google, then likely Facebook for antitrust action. I do think it will happen to Amazon, but not until those two are done. I personally think Jeff Bezos, who’s the smartest businessperson in the world, will likely spin AWS prophylactically. And my prediction, Michael, is that in the year 2025, the most valuable company in the world will be a recently spun, independent AWS. The largest, most profitable cloud company in the world would be a stock that everyone would own.”

  • Antitrust Case Against Facebook May Be Next

    Antitrust Case Against Facebook May Be Next

    Just days after the DOJ filed an antitrust case against Google, the FTC may be planning a similar case against Facebook.

    Tech giants are under more scrutiny now than at any time since Microsoft’s landmark antitrust case in 2001. The DOJ filed a case against Google over its search and search advertising business. The CEOs of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Twitter have also been called to testify before Congress, in some cases repeatedly.

    Now, according to Politico, the five FTC commissioners have met to discuss an antitrust case against Facebook. The company has repeatedly been accused of stifling competition by purchasing smaller rivals it deems a potential or future threat. In addition, Facebook has faced ongoing criticism for its mishandling of user privacy.

    Because of the confidential nature of the probe, Politico’s sources spoke anonymously. It’s unknown which way the FTC commissioners are leaning, and a decision is not expected for several weeks. Nonetheless, it’s the latest challenge facing Big Tech in general, and social media in particular.

  • DOJ Files Antitrust Charges Against Google

    DOJ Files Antitrust Charges Against Google

    The US Department of Justice has officially filed antitrust charges against Google, accusing the search giant of monopolistic practices regarding its search business.

    DOJ officials have been investigating Google for some time, with Attorney General William Barr pushing for a lawsuit to be filed. Google is widely seen as abusing its position as the dominant search engine, making it difficult for rivals to compete. In addition, Google’s dominance in search and search advertising effectively make it the gatekeeper of the internet, giving it unrivaled power over the success or failure of internet-based businesses.

    “Today, millions of Americans rely on the Internet and online platforms for their daily lives. Competition in this industry is vitally important, which is why today’s challenge against Google — the gatekeeper of the Internet — for violating antitrust laws is a monumental case both for the Department of Justice and for the American people,” said Attorney General William Barr. “Since my confirmation, I have prioritized the Department’s review of online market-leading platforms to ensure that our technology industries remain competitive. This lawsuit strikes at the heart of Google’s grip over the internet for millions of American consumers, advertisers, small businesses and entrepreneurs beholden to an unlawful monopolist.”

    In particular, Google is accused of engaging in anticompetitive behavior by restricting competition in searches in favor of protecting its own interests. This has led to a reduction in the quality of search results, as well as higher costs to advertisers. The DOJ believes a vibrant search industry would benefit both of these issues.

    Attorney Generals from Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina and Texas have joined the lawsuit.

    It remains to be seen if the government will be able to make its case. In recent weeks, there appeared to be disagreement about how to proceed, with long-time DOJ lawyers feeling more time was needed to adequately prepare a strong case. AG Barr pushed for the case to move forward, despite the concerns that prematurely doing so could give Google a significant advantage at trial.

  • Google Fails to Stop Full-Blown EU Fitbit Investigation

    Google Fails to Stop Full-Blown EU Fitbit Investigation

    It appears Google’s efforts to prevent an investigation into its Fitbit acquisition have been unsuccessful, with the EU ready to launch a full antitrust probe.

    Google recently announced a deal to purchase wearable maker Fitbit for $2.1 billion. Almost immediately, the deal drew scrutiny from US and EU officials over concerns about data privacy. Given the vast amount of health data Fitbit has access to, officials were concerned about Google now having access to it. In addition, there were concerns Google might use that data to unfairly gain an advantage over its rivals.

    The search giant has worked to assuage those concerns, vowing not to use the data in its advertising business. It appears those concessions were not enough, however, as CNBC is reporting the EU is planning on launching a full investigation.

    Google has repeatedly said the deal is about the devices, rather than the data. Apple has a commanding lead in the wearables market, and Google is eager to become more competitive. A successful Fitbit deal would help it do just that.

  • NY Attorney General Will Not Appeal T-Mobile Ruling

    NY Attorney General Will Not Appeal T-Mobile Ruling

    In more good news for T-Mobile, New York Attorney General Letitia James says she will not appeal the T-Mobile/Sprint merger ruling.

    Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero ruled in T-Mobile and Sprint’s favor, giving the go-ahead on their proposed merger. Both the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) had already approved the merger, but a coalition of states led by New York had filed a lawsuit to prevent it. The states had claimed that going from four to three major, national carriers would hurt competition, lead to higher prices and ultimately hurt consumers.

    After losing their case, AG James has said she will not appeal the ruling in a statement on her office’s website.

    “I’d like to thank California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and the 12 additional attorneys general from around the nation for their partnership throughout this lawsuit. After a thorough analysis, New York has decided not to move forward with an appeal in this case. Instead, we hope to work with all the parties to ensure that consumers get the best pricing and service possible, that networks are built out throughout our state, and that good-paying jobs are created here in New York. We are gratified that this process has yielded commitments from T-Mobile to create jobs in Rochester and engage in robust national diversity initiatives that will connect our communities with good jobs and technology. We are committed to continuing to fight for affordability and access for all of New York’s mobile customers.”

    In issuing his ruling, Judge Marrero made it clear it was not a single argument that caused him to rule the way he did, but rather the combination of all the arguments made. Cases like that are notoriously difficult to appeal, likely a factor in James’ decision not to.

    Either way, the only remaining hurdles for the merger are passing Tunney Act antitrust review and getting approval from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), neither of which are expected to be an issue.

  • EU Ramps Up Facebook Antitrust Inquiry

    EU Ramps Up Facebook Antitrust Inquiry

    European Union (EU) investigators are ramping up their antitrust inquiry into Facebook’s data practices, according to The Wall Street Journal.

    The EU’s investigators have been requesting “documents related to allegations by rival companies and politicians that Facebook leveraged access to its users’ data to stifle competition, rewarding partners and cutting off rivals, those people said.”

    One such example stems from how Facebook used VPN provider Onavo, which the company purchased in 2013. The WSJ reported in 2018 that Onavo was passing information about its users’ habits to Facebook, essentially serving as an early warning system for the social media giant. By providing information on what rival apps Onavo customers were using, Facebook could take action before those apps became a threat to Facebook’s business.

    According to the WSJ, the EU used a “law that allows for daily fines to punish noncompliance,” when requesting documents about how Facebook manages access to its user data. By using that law, the EU is tipping its hand that it doesn’t trust Facebook to comply with its requests unless it’s forced to do so. At the same time, by focusing on how Facebook manages data access, the EU’s investigation seems to be centering around these allegations of anticompetitive behavior.

    We will continue to provide updates as the story develops.

  • Google Finds A Way To Profit From EU Antitrust Ruling—At Bing’s Expense

    Google Finds A Way To Profit From EU Antitrust Ruling—At Bing’s Expense

    Last March Google was fined a record $5 billion by the EU over antitrust charges related to the company tying its browser and search engine to the Android OS. It appears the company has found a way to abide by the law while charging its competitors at the same time, according to The Verge.

    Starting March 1, EU citizens will be given a choice of four search engines—including Google—to use as the default search for Chrome, as well as the Android search box. To select the search engines that will appear, Google opted for an auction system.

    “The search engines shown to new users will vary for each EU country, with the selection decided based on a ‘fourth-price’ auction system. Each provider tells Google how much it’s willing to pay the company every time a user selects their product as the default. The three highest bidders are then shown to users, with the chosen provider paying Google the amount offered by the fourth-highest bid. This process is repeated every four months.”

    Under this system, Microsoft’s Bing is now only shown as an option in the UK and not in any other EU country. In all likelihood, this is because the UK has higher search ad revenue than other countries, and Microsoft was likely unwilling to pay a higher price for less profitable markets.

    As The Verge goes on to highlight, many of Google’s competitors are not happy with what is being perceived as a “pay-to-play auction” they feel goes against the spirit of the EU’s ruling. Given the close eye the EU has kept on Google, it will be interesting to see if they step in as a result of Google’s “solution.”

  • Google ‘Unrecognizable’ To Company Veterans

    Google ‘Unrecognizable’ To Company Veterans

    Google has undergone a number of major changes over the years, not the least of which is the two founders stepping down from their roles. Many of those changes have caused the company to be virtually “unrecognizable” to many Google veterans, according to CNBC.

    For many workers who spoke with CNBC, 2018 was a pivotal year that showed how much things had changed. Project Dragonfly became public knowledge, exposing Google’s attempt to build a censored search engine for China. In a company that had long treasured a reputation for open communication with its employees, the project had been kept on a need-to-know basis.

    Despite ending the project when employees expressed concern about the ethics of it, for many the damage had already been done.

    “There’s no way a few years before, they would have had a secret project with these kinds of ethical concerns,” Raph Levien, a former level 6 engineer who left Google after 11 years, told CNBC. “It crossed the line and felt misleading. It definitely felt like this was Google changing.”

    Another factor that has hurt the company’s reputation internally is how it has handled sexual abuse allegations, paying executives millions in severance packages despite allegations. The size of the company has also played a role, as it is much harder for a company of “more than 100,000 workers, many of whom are contractors instead of full-time employees,” to maintain the culture it started with.

    One thing is clear, based on CNBC’s report: For a company that is already in the spotlight for privacy issues and antitrust concerns, an internal breakdown of the very culture that made Google what it is, is the last thing the company needs.

  • Sprint Executive Expected Merger to Raise Prices, Undercutting T-Mobile Argument

    Sprint Executive Expected Merger to Raise Prices, Undercutting T-Mobile Argument

    As the trial to stop the T-Mobile/Sprint merger got underway today, Bloomberg is reporting that at least one Sprint executive suspected the merger would result in higher prices for consumers.

    As a coalition of 13 states and the District of Columbia try to prevent the two wireless companies from merging, T-Mobile has maintained that the merger will ultimately benefit customers. Part of the rationale is that T-Mobile and Sprint need to combine to have the size and resources necessary to compete with Verizon and AT&T. Without the merger, the two smaller companies have indicated they would not be able to compete as effectively in the 5G market, leaving Verizon and AT&T little competition or incentive to keep prices low.

    The states, on the other hand, have said that going from four major carriers to three would eliminate competition, resulting in higher prices. According to documents that have come to light on the first day of the trial, it seems that a Sprint executive agreed with that sentiment.

    “Roger Sole, Sprint’s chief marketing officer, said in a text message in 2017 to Marcelo Claure, the carrier’s chief executive officer at the time, that the deal could mean an increase of $5 a month in average revenue per subscriber. Industry leaders AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. would also benefit with fewer players in the market, he said.”

    We’ve already reported on the stakes in this trial, impacting how much states have a say in antitrust matters the federal government is not interested in pursuing. If more documents or testimony comes to light supporting Sole’s belief, the states may be able to make their case after all.