Google comes out on top as years-long Mexico antitrust case closed
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) -Mexico's antitrust watchdog said on Friday it had closed a case against Google, clearing the tech giant from any potential fines, after a multi-year investigation determined it did not engage in monopolistic practices in the country.
The investigation by Mexico's Federal Economic Competition Commission (Cofece), which began in 2020, focused on Google's digital advertising services via its search page as well as third-party websites.
The investigation focused on Google's advertising services via its search page as well as third-party websites, examining whether the company had an undue advantage over competitors in the digital advertising sector stemming from the design of its platform for buying online advertising.
Cofece said in a statement on Friday that its analysis had determined that Google users were not required to purchase advertising on third-party websites in order to purchase advertising on the Google search engine.
"We appreciate COFECE's decision recognizing that our products give advertisers the freedom and control to use our tools in the ways that best suit their needs," a Google spokesperson said.
Google had been facing a fine of up to 8% of its annual revenue in Mexico if Cofece determined it engaged in monopolistic practices.
Google parent Alphabet does not include specific revenue numbers for Mexico in its earnings reports, but according to annual results for 2024, the company's revenue for its "other Americas" region, which includes Latin America, was about $20.4 billion.
Google is facing antitrust challenges around the world as regulators fear how its search engine gives it an advantage.
In the United States, a U.S. district judge last year ruled Google holds an unlawful monopoly in online search and related advertising.
The U.S. Justice Department and a coalition of states want Google to share search data and cease multibillion-dollar payments to Apple and other smartphone makers to be the default search engine on new devices.
In a separate case, a U.S. federal judge said Google illegally dominated two markets for online advertising technology, with the Justice Department saying that Google should sell off at least its Google Ad Manager, which includes the company's publisher ad server and its ad exchange.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
16 minutes ago
- Forbes
These New Pixel 10 Features Will Challenge The Competition
The new Pixel 9 With the launch of Android 16, many expect the first smartphones to ship with the latest version of the OS will be Google's Pixel 10 and Pixel 10 Pro. While the focus will no doubt be placed on both the new capabilities of Android and the increased application of artificial intelligence, some huge hardware changes should not go unnoticed. The changes focus on the camera. It's already clear that Google is adding a telephoto lens to the Pixel 10; the Pixel 9's wide-angle and ultrawide-angle lens will be joined by a telephoto lens. This isn't a direct addition… the Pixel 9's with the 50 megapixel wide and 48 megapixel ultrawide will be bumped down to a 48 megapixel wide and 13 megapixel ultrawide pairing (a pairing that matches that of the Pixel 9a). Nevertheless, the telephoto will be welcome both in use and by the marketing team. The camera system is expected to feature gimbal-like stabilization across the entire Pixel 10 family. Using a mix of optical image stabilization, software-based electronic image stabilization, and AI algorithms, the Pixel 10 camera system should allow for sharper images thanks to the steadying influence of the hardware compensating for dynamic movement while the phone's camera is being used. The Pixel 10 has a critical role to play in the smartphone ecosystem. As the entry-level Pixel smartphone, it will challenge the current 'flagship-killer' handsets in price and capability. With it, Google will be looking to set the standard that consumers should expect at this price point. While the Pixel range plays a part in defining what it means to be a smartphone—be it a flagship, a foldable, or the base function of a phone—the Pixel 10 will arguably be the Pixel that can have the most significant impact on the ecosystem. Adding a telephoto lens and image stabilisation sets another marker for the competition. Whether it is a justification for a decision already made in their design process, or a push to include these elements in the next phone, the Pixel 10 represents Google's image of what a smartphone should be. And that view now includes some big steps forward for the camera. Now read the lates Pixel 10 and Android headlines in Forbes' weekly smartphone digest...
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Waymo cars became sitting ducks during the L.A. protests
Engineers working on self-driving technology have given a lot of thought to difficult questions over the years, including how to keep pedestrians safe and how to avoid collisions with other vehicles. But last weekend's protests in Los Angeles threw a spotlight on one of the thorny problems that remain for autonomous vehicles: what to do about arson, vandalism or other physical attacks. Five vehicles owned by Google's self-driving spinoff Waymo were set ablaze last Sunday during protests against the Trump administration's immigration policies. Images and video of the flaming cars quickly went viral, illustrating for a global audience how vulnerable robotaxis can be in volatile situations. For all their advanced technology, including expensive cameras and sensors, the cars seemed to be defenseless. Waymo says the five cars were in downtown Los Angeles to serve passengers when they were attacked. There were no drivers to plead for mercy, and with crowds surrounding the vehicles, there was no escape path that didn't include threatening pedestrians — something Waymo vehicles are programmed not to do. 'They're very much sitting ducks,' said Jeff Fong, who has worked at tech companies including Lyft and Postmates and now writes a newsletter about cities and technology. And it wasn't the first time Waymo was a victim of arson. Last year, a Waymo in San Francisco's Chinatown was set on fire during Lunar New Year celebrations. Police later charged a juvenile with starting the blaze, saying they had thrown a lit firework into the vehicle. Waymos have been vandalized in other ways, too, including having their tires slashed, their windshields smashed, their doors torn off and their exteriors defaced with spray paint. Local prosecutors have charged individuals in at least some cases. Part of what makes robotaxis vulnerable is their caution. While it's impossible to know if a human driver behind the steering wheel could have deterred or escaped vandalism in any specific case involving a robotaxi, driverless vehicles are generally designed to stay put if there's any risk that they'd hit a person while moving. 'There's been so much effort into making sure they can't hurt human beings,' Fong said. 'That's the problem Waymo has been solving for, rightfully so, but when you have the problem where a human wants to do harm, these cars have no countermeasures.' Autonomous technology companies, including Waymo, appear to be largely at a loss for ideas on how to deter vandalism over the long term. Their cameras may be a partial deterrent — Waymo says each of its cars has 29 cameras — and the company has cooperated with police to help find vandalism suspects after the fact. But Waymo's collection of street data through its cameras and sensors is also one of the sources of anger against the company and other startups like it. Some Uber and Lyft drivers have said that vandalism incidents bolster the importance of human drivers as a deterrent. A spokesperson for Waymo said that in response to the protests in Los Angeles and elsewhere, it was temporarily adjusting its service area. Waymo declined to make anyone available for an interview about the problems of arson and vandalism and how the company plans to deal with such incidents in the long term. The vandalism problem is mostly limited for now to Waymo, which is the biggest self-driving car company. It has about 1,500 vehicles operating in four regions, with additional cities scheduled to come online this year. But the market is set to become more competitive soon, with Tesla saying it plans to launch a robotaxi service this month in Austin, Texas, and Amazon-backed Zoox planning a service in Las Vegas and San Francisco. Representatives for Tesla and Zoox did not respond to requests for comment about how they plan to avoid incidents like last Sunday's attack on Waymo vehicles. The problem has been gnawing at robotaxi fans on message boards on Reddit. In one thread in January, users tossed around ideas like having dedicated security on motorcycles nearby or equipping Waymo vehicles with pepper spray. Adam Millard-Ball, director of the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies, said that robotaxis are a symbolic target for some street demonstrators. 'They're attacked not because they're autonomous cars but because they're a symbol of inequality in cities and a symbol of the power of large technology companies,' he said. He noted that electric scooters are also sometimes targets. He also said it's hard to imagine what the companies, police or city officials could do to eliminate the threat entirely. 'I don't think any country in the world has eliminated vandalism in public spaces,' he said. The incidents are problematic for Waymo on multiple levels: not only the cost of repairing or replacing the vehicles, but also the reputational risk when images and videos spread widely online. There's also the possible danger to passengers. And although no passengers were harmed in the arson incidents, some passengers have been delayed or reported feeling threatened when the cars they were riding in were vandalized from the outside. Last year, a San Francisco woman posted a video online after she said two men targeted her while riding in a Waymo. Then there's the lost business from what Waymo calls 'temporary service adjustments.' In Los Angeles and San Francisco this past week, Waymo stopped serving certain areas that are part of its normal service area. People using the company's app in recent days were greeted with a message, alluding to the street protests: 'Pickup times and routing may be affected by local events. Thank you for your patience.' In San Francisco, that meant Waymo refused to take customers through or to several neighborhoods, including parts of the Financial District, the Civic Center area near City Hall and the sprawling South of Market neighborhood. Waymo also limited service to the Mission District, a historically working-class and Latino neighborhood that's also home now to many tech workers and a vibrant nightlife scene. Thousands of people attended an anti-President Trump protest in the Mission on Monday night, and the effects on Waymo reverberated for days: A post on X with an example of rerouting around the Mission went viral Wednesday, getting 1.2 million views. Searches of the Waymo app by NBC News showed the service continuing to refuse service to parts of the Mission throughout the week, including during relatively quiet morning hours and on Friday. The app labeled certain destinations as 'unreachable.' A Waymo spokesperson said: 'We're taking these heightened measures now out of an abundance of caution.' They said the situation was temporary and subject to change quickly in response to conditions on the ground. Waymo hasn't published a map of which areas are restricted. Mass anti-Trump protests advocating for 'No Kings' are scheduled for Saturday nationwide, providing another potential disruption for robotaxis. Though the service restrictions may be temporary, they struck some people as discriminatory against poorer neighborhoods, with some social media users on X calling the practice 'redlining' on the part of Waymo. The term refers to the decadeslong practice of refusing home loans to predominantly Black neighborhoods. In contrast, ride-hailing services Uber and Lyft, which use human drivers, still offered rides to the Mission in recent days, according to NBC News searches of their apps. San Francisco's Municipal Transportation Agency rerouted some buses during the height of anti-Trump administration protests, but then resumed regular service. There have been no arrests for the attacks on Waymo vehicles in Los Angeles last Sunday. On Friday, the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) said it was taking the lead in investigating the Waymo attacks, making them the subject of a federal investigation. 'The cause of these fires is quite obvious,' ATF special agent in charge Kenneth Cooper of the Los Angeles Field Division said in a statement. 'The task at hand now is to determine who is responsible. ATF's National Response Team is going to be a tremendous asset, and we look forward to the results of their efforts to hold the responsible parties accountable,' he said. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Suze Orman Says This Is the Type of Financial Advisor You Should Have (And What They Should Do With Your Money)
Suze Orman is a self-made personal finance expert, bestselling author and podcast host who became a stockbroker after she was taken advantage of by one. Orman gives advice on a lot of different financial situations, but one she is passionate about is knowing whether you need a financial advisor — and how to find a good one. Trending Now: Try This: Here's what Suze Orman says about the type of financial advisor you should have, and what they should do with your money. On a recent episode of 'The Suze Orman Show,' a viewer emailed to ask if an annual fee of 0.09% as too much for a financial advisor to charge. Orman noted that this is a common way for advisors to get paid, and it's also motivating for the advisor. 'There are many people out there known as registered investment advisors that charge a percentage of money under management,' said Orman. 'Let's just say you gave a registered investment advisor $100,000. If they are being paid 0.09% on the $100,000, fine. If they take that $100,000 to $300,000, now they're making more money. They're being paid 0.09% on $300,000. 'But if they take that $100,000 to $50,000, now they're only being paid 0.09% on $50,000. So, you make money, they make more money. You lose money, they make less money. I like how that works.' Note that a fee of 0.09%, or 9 basis points, is very low, and the person asking the question probably meant 0.9%, or 90 basis points. More on this below. Find Out: Orman goes on to specify that a registered investment advisor who is charging a percentage of assets under management should be investing your money in individual stocks, not mutual funds or ETFs. '(They) should only be investing in individual stocks for you, not putting you into mutual funds where there are heavy expense ratios because then you're paying double, or they're charging you commissions or loads on mutual funds', she said. Once you've decided you want to work with a financial advisor, the next step is to find the right one. A good way to start is by asking trusted friends and family members. A personal recommendation from someone the advisor works with is better than all the advertising in the world. Collect a few names from people you know, and add in a Google search if you have to. Once you've narrowed the field to a few, look them up on BrokerCheck. This tool is from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, which regulates financial advisors. This tool will give you the advisor's employment history, registrations, and regulatory actions. When you have two or three names that look like good candidates, give them a call. Ask for an introductory meeting to discuss your situation. This can be a phone call, video conference or in-person meeting. When you meet, pay attention to how the advisor talks and listens to you. They should ask questions about your goals and objectives — what you want your money to do for you. They should ask about how much investing experience you have and how much risk you feel comfortable taking on. When they talk to you, they should explain what they do and how they do it in terms that you can understand. When the meeting ends, you should know what kinds of investments they would put you in, how often you should expect to hear from them, and, maybe most importantly, how much they charge. In the example from Suze Orman's show, the viewer asked about a fee of 0.09%, which may be incorrect. Most RIAs will charge in the neighborhood of 1%, so it's likely the person asking this question actually meant 90 basis points, or 0.9%. Investors with larger portfolios — say, over $1 million — may pay a smaller percentage, but ask if the advisor uses a sliding scale. Finding the right financial advisor is a good way to take some of the work of managing your money off your plate, but it's still important for you to stay involved. Make sure you understand how your investments are being managed, ask questions and meet with your advisor regularly. More From GOBankingRates How Much Money Is Needed To Be Considered Middle Class in Every State? This article originally appeared on Suze Orman Says This Is the Type of Financial Advisor You Should Have (And What They Should Do With Your Money) Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
