Latest news with #JodyGodoy
Time of India
4 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Google judge mulls softer remedies in US search antitrust case
By Jody Godoy WASHINGTON: A federal judge in Washington suggested on Friday he is considering making Alphabet's Google take less aggressive measures to restore competition in online search than the 10-year regime proposed by antitrust enforcers. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta heard closing arguments on Friday at a trial on proposals to address Google's illegal monopoly in online search and related advertising. "Ten years may seem like a short period, but in this space, a lot can change in weeks," he said, citing recent developments such as ChatGPT maker OpenAI buying a device startup. The DOJ 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. At the hearing, the judge floated the possibility of limited data sharing and ending the payments only if other measures do not increase competition. He also grappled with the rise of artificial intelligence products that could replace traditional search engines. An alternate default search engine in Apple's Safari browser is unlikely to come from existing rival search engines like DuckDuckGo or Bing, the judge said. "If anything it's going to be one of these AI companies that can do more than just search. And why? Because maybe people don't want 10 blue links anymore," he said, referring to earlier iterations of Google's search engine. The case has already rattled Google's share price by exposing Apple's plans to offer AI-based search options. The trial began in April and Mehta has said he aims to rule by August. AI "RIVALS"? Antitrust enforcers are concerned about how Google's search monopoly gives it an advantage in AI products like Gemini and vice versa. Nick Turley, OpenAI's product head for ChatGPT, testified that the ChatGPT creator is years away from its goal of being able to use its own search technology to answer 80% of queries and that having access to Google search data would help it focus on improving ChatGPT. Turley also said OpenAI would be interested in buying Chrome if Google is forced to sell it. But Mehta questioned whether companies like OpenAI or Perplexity should be considered Google competitors who would be given access to any data Google is required to share, given that the case focused on search engine competitors. "It seems to me you now want to kind of bring this other technology into the definition of general search engine markets that I am not sure quite fits," the judge said to DOJ attorney Adam Severt. Severt replied that while the first part of the case focused on the past, the remedies must be forward-looking. John Schmidtlein, an attorney for Google, said at the hearing that while generative AI is influencing how search looks, Google has addressed any concerns about competition in AI by no longer entering exclusive agreements with wireless carriers and smartphone makers including Samsung Electronics , leaving them free to load rival search and AI apps on new devices. Schmidtlein argued it would be inappropriate to give successful AI companies like OpenAI technology that Google has spent 20 years perfecting. "Coming to Google and asking Google for a handout when they are the market leader seems completely disproportionate to what this case is about," he said.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Judge in Google case questions future of search amid rise of AI
By Jody Godoy WASHINGTON (Reuters) -A judge asked the U.S. Department of Justice on Friday how much room there would be for new search engines to emerge given the rise of artificial intelligence, as antitrust enforcers press for Alphabet's Google to take dramatic measures to restore competition in online search. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta is overseeing the trial after ruling last year that Google illegally monopolized online search and related advertising. The case has already rattled Google's share price by exposing Apple's plans to offer AI-based search options. Mehta's questions during closing arguments on Friday showed the judge is grappling with how the landscape has changed in the five years since the case was brought and how to view AI companies such as OpenAI. Mehta asked DOJ attorney David Dahlquist during closing arguments in Washington whether AI should be considered a way to access search, or as a kind of competing technology. "Do you think someone is going to come off the sidelines and build a new general search engine in light of what we are seeing?" Mehta asked. Dahlquist replied that search is not going away, and that the DOJ's proposed remedies are designed to keep Google from blocking AI-based competitors. John Schmidtlein, an attorney for Google, said at the hearing that while generative AI is influencing how search looks, Google has addressed any concern about competition in AI by no longer entering exclusive agreements with wireless carriers and smartphone makers including Samsung Electronics, leaving them free to load rival search and AI apps on new devices. The DOJ and a coalition of states are pressing to make Google go further by selling its Chrome browser, sharing search data and ceasing multibillion-dollar payments to Apple and others to be the default search engine on new devices. The trial began in April and Mehta has said he aims to rule by August. AI "RIVALS"? The DOJ has expressed concern at the trial about the ways Google's search monopoly gives it an advantage in AI products like Gemini and vice versa. Nick Turley, OpenAI's product head for ChatGPT, testified that the ChatGPT creator is years away from its goal of being able to use its own search technology to answer 80% of queries and that having access to Google search data would help it focus on improving ChatGPT. Turley also said OpenAI would be interested in buying Chrome if Google is forced to sell it. But Mehta questioned whether companies like OpenAI or Perplexity should be considered Google competitors who would be given access to any data Google is required to share, given that the case focused on search engine competitors. "It seems to me you now want to kind of bring this other technology into the definition of general search engine markets that I am not sure quite fits," the judge said to DOJ attorney Adam Severt. Severt replied that while the first part of the case focused on the past, the remedies must be forward-looking. Schmidtlein argued it would be inappropriate to give successful AI companies like OpenAI technology that Google has spent 20 years perfecting. "Coming to Google and asking Google for a handout when they are the market leader seems completely disproportionate to what this case is about," he said.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Google and DOJ to make final push in US search antitrust case
By Jody Godoy WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Alphabet's Google and U.S. antitrust enforcers will make their final arguments on whether the tech giant should be forced to sell its Chrome browser or adopt other measures to restore competition in online search, as the blockbuster antitrust trial concludes on Friday. The U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of states are pressing to make Google not only sell Chrome, but also share search data and cease multibillion-dollar payments to Apple and other smartphone makers and wireless carriers that set Google as the default search engine on new devices. The proposals aim to restore competition after a judge found last year that Google illegally dominates the online search and related advertising markets. Artificial intelligence companies could get a boost after already rattling Google's status as the go-to tool to find information online. U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta is overseeing the trial, which began in April. He has said he aims to rule on the proposals by August. If the judge does require Google to sell off Chrome, OpenAI would be interested in buying it, Nick Turley, OpenAI's product head for ChatGPT, said at the trial. OpenAI would also benefit from access to Google's search data, which would help it make responses to user inquiries more accurate and up to date, Turley said. Google says the proposals go far beyond what is legally justified by the court's ruling, and would give away its technology to competitors. The company has already begun loosening agreements with smartphone makers including Samsung Electronics to allow them to load rival search and AI products. The DOJ wants the judge to go farther, banning Google from making lucrative payments in exchange for installation of its search app. 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
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
US supports Republican states' argument in BlackRock climate case
By Jody Godoy and Ross Kerber (Reuters) -U.S. federal antitrust enforcers expressed support on Thursday for arguments wielded by Republican states that accuse asset managers BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street of conspiring through climate activism to decrease coal output. The U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission filed a statement of interest in the case where Texas and 12 other states claim the companies used their substantial holdings in U.S. coal companies to discourage competition. The entry of the federal officials raises the stakes for the case that tests how freely the three fund firms may act with the combined $27 trillion they manage for investors. The companies have denied wrongdoing and called the case "half-baked." In recent years, they have reduced their focus on climate and social issues while maintaining substantial investments in fossil fuel companies. Nonetheless, the agencies on Thursday urged the judge overseeing the case in Tyler, Texas, to reject several of the arguments the asset managers made in their bid to dismiss the case, including that the alleged conduct falls under an exemption for passive investors. In their court brief, the agencies cited allegations the fund firms' conduct raised U.S. energy prices. "This case is about precisely the sort of conduct, including concerted efforts to reduce output, which have long been condemned under the antitrust laws," the agencies said. Assistant Attorney General Gail Slater, who leads the DOJ's antitrust division, and FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson said in statements that competition in coal is important to U.S. President Donald Trump's goal of American energy dominance. BlackRock said that forcing asset managers to divest from coal companies -- one outcome sought by the state plaintiffs -- would harm the companies' access to capital and likely raise energy prices. "The DOJ and FTC's support for this baseless case undermines the Trump Administration's goal of American energy independence," BlackRock said. State Street said it acts in the long-term interests of investors and called the lawsuit "baseless." Vanguard reiterated its prior comment that it would defend its history of safeguarding returns for investors. The Investment Company Institute, an industry trade group, said it was "very troubled by the implications of the specious arguments" in the filing in support of the suit the group said risks major problems for funds, investors and energy companies. The agencies, the ICI said, are "pushing an expansive reading of antitrust law that would chill ordinary investment activity." Reuters first reported earlier on Thursday that the agencies were expected to support the states' development marks a political setback for the three managers, already under fire from conservative Republicans, many from energy-producing states. There were signs of thawing relations in February when BlackRock led a consortium to buy ports near the strategic Panama Canal, a deal hailed by Trump. In addition, U.S. energy regulators in April renewed BlackRock's permission to own major stakes in public utility companies. U.S. District Judge Jeremy Kernodle is scheduled to hear arguments on the asset managers' bid to dismiss the case in June.
Time of India
23-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
FTC drops case over Microsoft's $69 billion Activision Blizzard deal
By Jody Godoy The U.S. Federal Trade Commission dropped a case that sought to block Microsoft 's $69 billion purchase of "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard , saying on Thursday that pursuing the case against the long-closed deal was not in the public interest. FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson is seeking to use the agency's resources for cases that fit with President Donald Trump's agenda, such as a probe related to whether advertisers colluded to spend less on X first reported by Reuters on Thursday. Ferguson is beginning to shut down some efforts started by his predecessor Lina Khan, including dropping a case on Thursday that had accused PepsiCo of price discrimination that favored Walmart. The FTC lost an appeal on May 7 seeking to reverse a judge's decision declining to block the Microsoft-Activision deal, which closed in 2023. Microsoft President Brad Smith said on Thursday that the FTC's decision to drop the case was "a victory for players across the country and for common sense in Washington, D.C." When challenging a new merger, the FTC typically asks a judge to temporarily block the deal to give the agency time to challenge it in its own administrative court. But deals that are temporarily blocked are often abandoned. Though the FTC lost its case seeking to block the deal temporarily, the agency could have sought to unwind the acquisition at a trial that was scheduled for July. The Activision Blizzard transaction marked the largest-ever acquisition in the video gaming market. The FTC claimed the tie-up would allow Microsoft to fend off competitors to the Xbox console and to its subscription and cloud-based gaming business.
