Skip to main content

Department of Justice sued google.

 The DoJ has sued Google for allegedly exer­cising mono­pol­istic con­trol of the digital ads mar­ket in the latest legal


broad­side against the US tech­no­logy giant.—The US Depart­ment of Justice has sued Google for allegedly exer­cising mono­pol­istic con­trol of the digital advert­ising mar­ket, in the latest legal broad­side against the busi­ness as Wash­ing­ton seeks to crack down on the dom­in­ance of Big Tech.

A com­plaint filed yes­ter­day by the DoJ and a group of US states in a Vir­ginia fed­eral court accuses Google of using «anti-com­pet­it­ive, exclu­sion­ary and unlaw­ful means to elim­in­ate or severely dimin­ish any threat to its dom­in­ance over digital advert­ising tech­no­lo­gies».


The ‘behemoth’ is accused of ‘a sys­tem­atic cam­paign to seize con­trol of the wide swath of high-tech tools’

Author­it­ies also accused Google of hav­ing «per­vas­ive con­flicts of interest» because it con­trols numer­ous aspects of the digital ad mar­ket, includ­ing the tech used by web­site pub­lish­ers to sell ad space and the biggest exchange where ads are sold.
The US gov­ern­ment has accused Google of viol­at­ing the 1890 Sher­man Anti­trust Act, one of the coun­try’s main cor­por­ate anti­trust laws. It is seek­ing dam­ages and demand­ing that the com­pany be forced to divest its Google Ad Man­ager suite.
Google did not respond to a request for com­ment.
This is the first law­suit against Google filed by the DoJ’s anti­trust unit under the lead­er­ship of Jonathan Kanter, a critic of Big Tech who has pri­or­it­ised crack­ing down on anti-com­pet­it­ive prac­tices in the industry.

Labels:

Comments

  1. Ana25 January 2023 at 11:38

    This was coming sooner or later. Google has no real competitor in its market so it was just a matter of time before they started eliminating or diminishing potential threats to its dominance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebecca25 January 2023 at 12:03

      They've been doing this for years and no one at the DoJ seemed to notice. I wonder what changed?

      Delete
    2. Tim25 January 2023 at 13:10

      I think Jonathan Kanter has it in for Google plus he might be supported by other people and companies that want Google to suffer and lose some of its power.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Cloud Bookkeeping

HS2 cost cuts new routes and add delays.

 Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have begun work on «Project Sil­ver­light» sug­gest­ing the high­speed rail scheme might face four addi­tional years of delay. The planned High Speed 2 rail line faces fur­ther delays of up to four years and more cuts to the project under plans being drawn up by min­is­ters to rein in its bal­loon­ing costs. The extra delays to the coun­try’s biggest infra­struc­ture project would mean that it would not be com­pleted until as late as 2045 — 12 years after ori­gin­ally planned. «This is a func­tion of infla­tion; we are hav­ing to find huge sav­ings because the cost of everything the depart­ment is already doing will have become so much more expens­ive by then,» said one gov­ern­ment offi­cial. In Octo­ber, the FT repor­ted that the Treas­ury had asked HS2’s man­age­ment team to identify poten­tial cuts or «scope reduc­tions» to the high-speed line. Trans­port depart­ment offi­cials have sub­sequently begun work on Project Sil­ver­light aimed at fi...
4 comments
Read more

Small business will be excluded from fraud law.

  Min­is­ters are plan­ning to exclude small busi­nesses from anti-fraud legis­la­tion by nar­row­ing the scope of a crim­inal offence tar­get­ing com­pan­ies that fail to pre­vent eco­nomic crimes. MPs and anti-cor­rup­tion cam­paign­ers had hoped the gov­ern­ment would seek to amend the eco­nomic crime and cor­por­ate trans­par­ency bill to ensure the new offence covered all com­pan­ies. The plans to limit the scope of the amend­ments will also dis­ap­point those who had hoped the legis­la­tion would remove key hurdles to the pro­sec­u­tion of white-col­lar crime. A new «fail­ure to pre­vent» offence for fraud would bring it in line with exist­ing sim­ilar cor­por­ate offences for bribery and tax eva­sion. At present, pro­sec­utors need only prove that organ­isa­tions lacked «reas­on­able» or «adequate» con­trols to pur­sue the offence in bribery and tax eva­sion cases. «It would be much more sens­ible for the gov­ern­ment to provide strong guid­ance for SMEs on what these pro­ce...
3 comments
Read more

Doubt on CS's collateral.

  Credit Suisse provided an emergency $140mn loan to Greensill Capital based partly on invoices to companies that deny ever doing the business stated on the documents. The Swiss bank provided the loan in October 2020, less than five months before the collapse of Greensill, a supply chain finance firm that counted former British prime minister David Cameron as a senior adviser. Invoices issued by metals magnate Sanjeev Gupta’s Liberty Commodities and sold to Greensill formed part of the collateral for the loan, according to documents seen by the Financial Times and people familiar with the transaction. Yet several of the parties named on the invoices have told the FT they did no business with Liberty. GFG has consistently denied any wrongdoing. Credit Suisse’s loan had a clause dictating that the collateral value had to be equal to or greater than the $140mn borrowed. The terms of the debt agreement only allowed invoices on Green-sill’s balance sheet to count towards this tally if t...
2 comments
Read more