Latest news with #USJusticeDepartment
Economic Times
a day ago
- Business
- Economic Times
Google, Justice Department face off in climactic showdown in search monopoly case
Google will return to federal court Friday to fend off the US Justice Department's attempt to topple its internet empire at the same time it's navigating a pivotal shift to artificial intelligence that could undercut its power. ADVERTISEMENT The legal and technological threats facing Google are among the key issues that will be dissected during the closing arguments of a legal proceeding that will determine the changes imposed upon the company in the wake of its dominant search engine being declared as an illegal monopoly by US District Judge Amit Mehta last year. Brandishing evidence presented during a recent three-week stretch of hearings, Justice Department lawyers will attempt to persuade Mehta to order a radical shake-up that includes a ban on Google paying to lock its search engine in as the default on smart devices and an order requiring the company to sell its Chrome browser. Google lawyers are expected to assert only minor concessions are needed, especially as the upheaval triggered by advances in artificial intelligence already are reshaping the search landscape, as alternative, conversational search options are rolling out from AI startups that are hoping to use the Department of Justice's four-and-half-year-old case to gain the upper hand in the next technological frontier."Over weeks of testimony, we heard from a series of well-funded companies eager to gain access to Google's technology so they don't have to innovate themselves," Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, wrote in a blog post earlier this month. "What we didn't hear was how DOJ's extreme proposals would benefit consumers." After the day-long closing arguments, Mehta will spend much of the summer mulling a decision that he plans to issue before Labour Day. Google has already vowed to appeal the ruling that branded its search engine as a monopoly, a step it can't take until the judge orders a remedy. ADVERTISEMENT While both sides of this showdown agree that AI is an inflection point for the industry's future, they have disparate views on how the shift will affect Google. The Justice Department contends that AI technology by itself won't rein in Google's power, arguing additional legal restraints must be slapped on a search engine that's the main reason its parent company, Alphabet Inc., is valued at USD 2 trillion. ADVERTISEMENT Google has already been deploying AI to transform its search engine into an answer engine, an effort that has so far helped maintain its perch as the internet's main gateway despite inroads being made by alternatives from the likes of OpenAI and Justice Department contends a divestiture of the Chrome browser that Google CEO Sundar Pichai helped build nearly 20 years ago would be among the most effective countermeasures against Google continuing to amass massive volumes of browser traffic and personal data that could be leveraged to retain its dominance in the AI era. Executives from both OpenAi and Perplexity testified last month that they would be eager bidders for the Chrome browser if Mehta orders its sale. ADVERTISEMENT The debate over Google's fate also has pulled in opinions from Apple, mobile app developers, legal scholars and which collects more than USD 20 billion annually to make Google the default search engine on the iPhone and its other devices, filed briefs arguing against the Justice Department's proposed 10-year ban on such lucrative lock-in agreements. Apple told the judge that prohibiting the contracts would deprive the company of money that it funnels into its own research, and that the ban might even make Google even more powerful because the company would be able to hold onto its money while consumers would end up choosing its search engine anyway. The Cupertino, California, company also told the judge a ban wouldn't compel it to build its own search engine to compete against Google. ADVERTISEMENT In other filings, a group of legal scholars said the Justice Department's proposed divestiture of Chrome would be an improper penalty that would inject unwarranted government interference in a company's business. Meanwhile, former Federal Trade Commission officials James Cooper and Andrew Stivers warned that another proposal that would require Google to share its data with rival search engines "does not account for the expectations users have developed over time regarding the privacy, security, and stewardship" of their personal App Association, a group that represents mostly small software developers, also advised Mehta not to adopt the Justice Department's proposed changes because of the ripple effects they would have across the tech Google in the way the Justice Department envisions would make it more difficult for startups to realize their goal of being acquired, the App Association wrote. "Developers will be overcome by uncertainty" if Google is torn apart, the group argues. Buy Y Combinator, an incubator that has helped create hundreds of startups collectively worth about USD 800 billion filed documents pushing for the dramatic overhaul of Google, whose immense power has discouraged venture capitalists from investing in areas that are considered to be part of the company's "kill zone." Startups "also need to be able to get their products into the hands of users, free from restrictive dealing and self-preferencing that locks up important distribution channels. As things stand, Google has locked up the most critical distribution channels, freezing the general search and search text advertising markets into static competition for more than a decade," Y Combinator told Mehta.
Time of India
a day ago
- Business
- Time of India
Google, Justice Department face off in climactic showdown in search monopoly case
Google will return to federal court Friday to fend off the US Justice Department 's attempt to topple its internet empire at the same time it's navigating a pivotal shift to artificial intelligence that could undercut its power. The legal and technological threats facing Google are among the key issues that will be dissected during the closing arguments of a legal proceeding that will determine the changes imposed upon the company in the wake of its dominant search engine being declared as an illegal monopoly by US District Judge Amit Mehta last year. Brandishing evidence presented during a recent three-week stretch of hearings, Justice Department lawyers will attempt to persuade Mehta to order a radical shake-up that includes a ban on Google paying to lock its search engine in as the default on smart devices and an order requiring the company to sell its Chrome browser. Google lawyers are expected to assert only minor concessions are needed, especially as the upheaval triggered by advances in artificial intelligence already are reshaping the search landscape, as alternative, conversational search options are rolling out from AI startups that are hoping to use the Department of Justice's four-and-half-year-old case to gain the upper hand in the next technological frontier. "Over weeks of testimony, we heard from a series of well-funded companies eager to gain access to Google's technology so they don't have to innovate themselves," Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, wrote in a blog post earlier this month. "What we didn't hear was how DOJ's extreme proposals would benefit consumers." Live Events After the day-long closing arguments, Mehta will spend much of the summer mulling a decision that he plans to issue before Labour Day. Google has already vowed to appeal the ruling that branded its search engine as a monopoly, a step it can't take until the judge orders a remedy. Discover the stories of your interest Blockchain 5 Stories Cyber-safety 7 Stories Fintech 9 Stories E-comm 9 Stories ML 8 Stories Edtech 6 Stories While both sides of this showdown agree that AI is an inflection point for the industry's future, they have disparate views on how the shift will affect Google. The Justice Department contends that AI technology by itself won't rein in Google's power, arguing additional legal restraints must be slapped on a search engine that's the main reason its parent company, Alphabet Inc. , is valued at USD 2 trillion. Google has already been deploying AI to transform its search engine into an answer engine, an effort that has so far helped maintain its perch as the internet's main gateway despite inroads being made by alternatives from the likes of OpenAI and Perplexity. The Justice Department contends a divestiture of the Chrome browser that Google CEO Sundar Pichai helped build nearly 20 years ago would be among the most effective countermeasures against Google continuing to amass massive volumes of browser traffic and personal data that could be leveraged to retain its dominance in the AI era. Executives from both OpenAi and Perplexity testified last month that they would be eager bidders for the Chrome browser if Mehta orders its sale. The debate over Google's fate also has pulled in opinions from Apple , mobile app developers, legal scholars and startups. Apple, which collects more than USD 20 billion annually to make Google the default search engine on the iPhone and its other devices, filed briefs arguing against the Justice Department's proposed 10-year ban on such lucrative lock-in agreements. Apple told the judge that prohibiting the contracts would deprive the company of money that it funnels into its own research, and that the ban might even make Google even more powerful because the company would be able to hold onto its money while consumers would end up choosing its search engine anyway. The Cupertino, California, company also told the judge a ban wouldn't compel it to build its own search engine to compete against Google. In other filings, a group of legal scholars said the Justice Department's proposed divestiture of Chrome would be an improper penalty that would inject unwarranted government interference in a company's business. Meanwhile, former Federal Trade Commission officials James Cooper and Andrew Stivers warned that another proposal that would require Google to share its data with rival search engines "does not account for the expectations users have developed over time regarding the privacy, security, and stewardship" of their personal information. The App Association, a group that represents mostly small software developers, also advised Mehta not to adopt the Justice Department's proposed changes because of the ripple effects they would have across the tech industry. Hobbling Google in the way the Justice Department envisions would make it more difficult for startups to realize their goal of being acquired, the App Association wrote. "Developers will be overcome by uncertainty" if Google is torn apart, the group argues. Buy Y Combinator, an incubator that has helped create hundreds of startups collectively worth about USD 800 billion filed documents pushing for the dramatic overhaul of Google, whose immense power has discouraged venture capitalists from investing in areas that are considered to be part of the company's "kill zone." Startups "also need to be able to get their products into the hands of users, free from restrictive dealing and self-preferencing that locks up important distribution channels. As things stand, Google has locked up the most critical distribution channels, freezing the general search and search text advertising markets into static competition for more than a decade," Y Combinator told Mehta.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
a day ago
- Business
- Business Standard
US formally moves to dismiss prosecution against Boeing over deadly crashes
The US Justice Department has formally moved to dismiss a criminal fraud charge against Boeing and has asked a judge to cancel an upcoming trial connected to two plane crashes that killed 346 people off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia, according to court documents filed Thursday. The deal, announced last week, will allow the American aircraft manufacturer to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading US regulators about the 737 Max jetliner before the planes crashed less than five months apart in 2018 and 2019. The agreement in principle will require the company to pay and invest more than $1.1 billion, including an additional $445 million for the crash victims' families, in return for dismissing the criminal case, according to court documents. Dismissing the fraud charge will allow the manufacturer to avoid a possible criminal conviction that could have jeopardised the company's status as a federal contractor, experts said. US District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth, Texas, will decide whether to accept the motion to dismiss, accept the terms of the non-prosecution agreement and whether to cancel the trial. O'Connor on Thursday ordered all the lawyers to present him with a briefing schedule on the government's motion by June 4. Some relatives of the passengers who died in the crashes have been pushing for a public trial, prosecution of former company officials, and more severe financial punishment for Boeing. The Justice Department has noted that the victims' families had mixed views on the proposed deal. Nadia Milleron, a Massachusetts resident whose 24-year-old daughter, Samya Stumo, died in the Ethiopia crash, in an email Thursday said it hurt her to read the Justice Department's false statement that the agreement will secure meaningful accountability, deliver public benefits and bring finality to a complex case whose outcome would otherwise be uncertain. This is not a difficult or complex case because Boeing signed a confession, Milleron said. There will be no accountability as a result of the NPA (non-prosecution deal). Boeing said in a statement that the company is committed to complying with its obligations under the resolution, including commitments to further institutional improvements and investments, as well as additional compensation for families of those who died in the two plane crashes. We are deeply sorry for their losses, and remain committed to honouring their loved ones' memories by pressing forward with the broad and deep changes to our company that we have made to strengthen our safety system and culture, a Boeing spokesperson said in the statement. Attorney Mark Lindquist, who represents dozens of the victims' families, said in a statement that although he wanted to see a more vigorous prosecution, he didn't think it was going to happen. At this point, I can only hope the criminal case and the lawsuits motivated Boeing to improve safety, Lindquist said. That's what really matters. We all want to walk onto a Boeing plane and feel safe. Boeing was accused of misleading the Federal Aviation Administration about aspects of the Max before the agency certified the plane for flight. Boeing did not tell airlines and pilots about a new software system that could turn the plane's nose down without input from pilots if a sensor detected that the plane might go into an aerodynamic stall. The Max planes crashed after a faulty reading from the sensor pushed the nose down and pilots were unable to regain control. After the second crash, Max jets were grounded until the company redesigned the software. The Justice Department charged Boeing in 2021 with deceiving FAA regulators about the software and about how much training pilots would need to fly the plane safely. The department agreed not to prosecute Boeing at the time, however, if the company paid a USD 2.5 billion settlement, including the USD 243.6 million fine, and took steps to comply with anti-fraud laws for three years. But last year, federal prosecutors said Boeing violated the terms of the 2021 agreement by failing to make promised changes to detect and prevent violations of federal anti-fraud laws. Boeing agreed last July to plead guilty to the felony fraud charge instead of enduring what could have been a lengthy public trial. Then in December, O'Connor rejected the plea deal. The judge said the diversity, inclusion and equity, or DEI, policies in the government and at Boeing could result in race being a factor in picking a monitor to oversee Boeing's compliance with the agreement. Under the new agreement, Boeing must retain an independent compliance consultant who will make recommendations for further improvement and report back to the government, court documents said.
Powys County Times
2 days ago
- Business
- Powys County Times
US formally moves to dismiss criminal case against Boeing over crashes
The US Justice Department has formally moved to dismiss a criminal fraud charge against Boeing and asked a judge to cancel an upcoming trial connected to two plane crashes that killed 346 people off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia. The deal, announced last week, will allow the American aircraft manufacturer to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading US regulators about the 737 Max jetliner before the planes crashed less than five months apart in 2018 and 2019. The 'agreement in principle' will require the company to pay and invest more than 1.1 billion dollars (£814.7 million), including an additional 445 million dollars (£329 million) for the crash victims' families, in return for dismissing the criminal case, according to court documents. Dismissing the fraud charge will allow the manufacturer to avoid a possible criminal conviction that could have jeopardised the company's status as a federal contractor, experts have said. US District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth, Texas, will decide whether to accept the motion to dismiss, accept the terms of the non-prosecution agreement and cancel the trial. Mr O'Connor on Thursday ordered all the lawyers to present him with a briefing schedule on the government's motion by June 4. Some relatives of the passengers who died in the crashes have been pushing for a public trial, the prosecution of former company officials, and more severe financial punishment for Boeing. The Justice Department has noted that the victims' families had mixed views on the proposed deal. Nadia Milleron, a Massachusetts resident whose 24-year-old daughter, Samya Stumo, died in the Ethiopia crash, in an email Thursday said it hurt her to read the Justice Department's 'false' statement that the agreement will secure meaningful accountability, deliver public benefits and bring finality to a complex case whose outcome would otherwise be uncertain. 'This is not a difficult or complex case because Boeing signed a confession,' Ms Milleron said. 'There will be no accountability as a result of the NPA (non-prosecution deal).' Boeing said in a statement that the company is committed to complying with its obligations under the resolution, including commitments to further institutional improvements and investments, as well as additional compensation for families of those who died in the two plane crashes. 'We are deeply sorry for their losses, and remain committed to honouring their loved ones' memories by pressing forward with the broad and deep changes to our company that we have made to strengthen our safety system and culture,' a Boeing spokesperson said in the statement. Lawyer Mark Lindquist, who represents dozens of the victims' families, said in a statement on Thursday that although he had wanted to see a more vigorous prosecution, he did not think it was going to happen. 'At this point, I can only hope the criminal case and the lawsuits motivated Boeing to improve safety,' Mr Lindquist said. 'That's what really matters. We all want to walk onto a Boeing plane and feel safe.' Boeing was accused of misleading the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) about aspects of the Max before the agency certified the plane for flight. Boeing did not tell airlines and pilots about a new software system that could turn the plane's nose down without input from pilots if a sensor detected that the plane might go into an aerodynamic stall. The Max planes crashed after a faulty reading from the sensor pushed the nose down and pilots were unable to regain control. After the second crash, Max jets were grounded until the company redesigned the software. The Justice Department charged Boeing in 2021 with deceiving FAA regulators about the software and about how much training pilots would need to fly the plane safely. The department agreed not to prosecute Boeing at the time, however, if the company paid a 2.5 billion dollar (£1.8 billion) settlement, including the 243.6 million dollar (£180 million) fine, and took steps to comply with anti-fraud laws for three years. But last year, federal prosecutors said Boeing violated the terms of the 2021 agreement by failing to make promised changes to detect and prevent violations of federal anti-fraud laws. Boeing agreed last July to plead guilty to the felony fraud charge instead of enduring what could have been a lengthy public trial. Then, in December, Mr O'Connor rejected the plea deal. The judge said the diversity, inclusion and equity (DEI) policies in the government and at Boeing could result in race being a factor in picking a monitor to oversee Boeing's compliance with the agreement. Under the new agreement, Boeing must retain an 'independent compliance consultant' who will make recommendations for 'further improvement' and report back to the government, court documents said.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
US formally moves to dismiss prosecution against Boeing, asks judge to cancel trial over crashes
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The US Justice Department has formally moved to dismiss a criminal fraud charge against Boeing and has asked a judge to cancel an upcoming trial connected to two plane crashes that killed 346 people off the coast of Indonesia and in Ethiopia, according to court documents filed deal, announced last week, will allow the American aircraft manufacturer to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading US regulators about the 737 Max jetliner before the planes crashed less than five months apart in 2018 and "agreement in principle" will require the company to pay and invest more than USD 1.1 billion, including an additional USD 445 million for the crash victims' families, in return for dismissing the criminal case, according to court the fraud charge will allow the manufacturer to avoid a possible criminal conviction that could have jeopardised the company's status as a federal contractor, experts District Judge Reed O'Connor in Fort Worth, Texas, will decide whether to accept the motion to dismiss, accept the terms of the non-prosecution agreement and whether to cancel the trial.O'Connor on Thursday ordered all the lawyers to present him with a briefing schedule on the government's motion by June relatives of the passengers who died in the crashes have been pushing for a public trial, prosecution of former company officials, and more severe financial punishment for Justice Department has noted that the victims' families had mixed views on the proposed Milleron, a Massachusetts resident whose 24-year-old daughter, Samya Stumo, died in the Ethiopia crash, in an email Thursday said it hurt her to read the Justice Department's "false" statement that the agreement will secure meaningful accountability, deliver public benefits and bring finality to a complex case whose outcome would otherwise be uncertain."This is not a difficult or complex case because Boeing signed a confession," Milleron said. "There will be no accountability as a result of the NPA (non-prosecution deal)."Boeing said in a statement that the company is committed to complying with its obligations under the resolution, including commitments to further institutional improvements and investments, as well as additional compensation for families of those who died in the two plane crashes."We are deeply sorry for their losses, and remain committed to honouring their loved ones' memories by pressing forward with the broad and deep changes to our company that we have made to strengthen our safety system and culture," a Boeing spokesperson said in the Mark Lindquist, who represents dozens of the victims' families, said in a statement that although he wanted to see a more vigorous prosecution, he didn't think it was going to happen."At this point, I can only hope the criminal case and the lawsuits motivated Boeing to improve safety," Lindquist said. "That's what really matters. We all want to walk onto a Boeing plane and feel safe."Boeing was accused of misleading the Federal Aviation Administration about aspects of the Max before the agency certified the plane for did not tell airlines and pilots about a new software system that could turn the plane's nose down without input from pilots if a sensor detected that the plane might go into an aerodynamic Max planes crashed after a faulty reading from the sensor pushed the nose down and pilots were unable to regain the second crash, Max jets were grounded until the company redesigned the Justice Department charged Boeing in 2021 with deceiving FAA regulators about the software and about how much training pilots would need to fly the plane department agreed not to prosecute Boeing at the time, however, if the company paid a USD 2.5 billion settlement, including the USD 243.6 million fine, and took steps to comply with anti-fraud laws for three last year, federal prosecutors said Boeing violated the terms of the 2021 agreement by failing to make promised changes to detect and prevent violations of federal anti-fraud agreed last July to plead guilty to the felony fraud charge instead of enduring what could have been a lengthy public in December, O'Connor rejected the plea judge said the diversity, inclusion and equity, or DEI, policies in the government and at Boeing could result in race being a factor in picking a monitor to oversee Boeing's compliance with the the new agreement, Boeing must retain an "independent compliance consultant" who will make recommendations for "further improvement" and report back to the government, court documents said.
