WASHINGTON, Jan 17 — Google filed a notice yesterday to appeal a federal judge’s ruling that it held an illegal monopoly on online search, court records show.A US district...
‘We want what they promised us last time’: After demolition, Kampung Jalan Papan residents demand Selangor honour 2018 housing pledgeGoogle filed a notice yesterday to appeal a federal judge’s ruling that it held an illegal monopoly on online search, court records show.
— Reuters pic Unlock 4%* + 10%* p.a. promo rate for 3 months and enjoy FREE RM10 & when you sign up using code VERSAMM10 with min. cash of RM100 today! T&Cs apply.WASHINGTON, Jan 17 — Google filed a notice yesterday to appeal a federal judge’s ruling that it held an illegal monopoly on online search, court records show. A US district judge decided in 2024 that the internet giant had a monopoly on search and text advertising through exclusive distribution agreements that made it the “default” option people were likely to use. Yesterday, Google said the ruling “ignored the reality that people use Google because they want to, not because they’re forced to.” “The decision failed to account for the rapid pace of innovation and intense competition we face from established players and well-funded start-ups,” Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, wrote in a blog post. The company asked District Court Judge Amit Mehta to pause an order in the case requiring Google to share data with its rivals in an effort to level the playing field in online search. That order risks Google losing trade secrets before a decision is made on its appeal, the company argued in a court filing. Mehta had imposed the order at the same time that he rejected a request from the US government that Google sell its Chrome web browser. He said at the time that Google must make available to “qualified competitors” search index data and user interaction information that rivals can use to improve their services. Google on Friday said it is not seeking to postpone other requirements from Mehta’s previous orders, including those related to “privacy and security safeguards” for user data. “Although Google believes that these remedies are unwarranted and should never have been imposed, it is prepared to do everything short of turning over its data or providing syndicated results and ads while its appeal is pending,” the company said. — AFP What you see isn’t always what you get: KL domestic trade enforcers seize over 3,500 pieces of gold marketed as ‘pure’
US District Judge Ruling Online Search Competition Lee-Anne Mulholland District Court Judge Amit Mehta Data Sharing Order
Malaysia Latest News, Malaysia Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Flaw In Google Fast Pair Audio Devices That Could Give Hackers AccessA flaw was found in the implementation of the Google Fast Pair tech in 17 audio devices that can let hackers hijack them using the same tech.
Read more »
Washington lowers Taiwan tariffs to 15pc, secures US$250b semiconductor reshoring pushWASHINGTON, Jan 16 — The United States said Thursday that it has signed a deal with Taiwan to reduce tariffs on goods from the democratic island, while increasing Taiwanese...
Read more »
MCMC-X meeting scheduled for Jan 21, says FahmiUsed to help manage blocked or stuffy noses, you might come to rely on these sprays to help you breath.
Read more »
Fahmi: MCMC–X meeting set for Jan 21 to address online safety concerns and Grok misuseCYBERJAYA, Jan 16 — The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) and social media platform X will hold a meeting next Wednesday (January 21) to discuss online...
Read more »
Google asks US judge to defer order forcing it to share data while it appealsON a quiet weekday morning in Bangsar, families stroll into Bangsar Shopping Centre (BSC) and neighbours exchange familiar hellos.
Read more »
Google Appeals Ruling, Defends Search Monopoly Based on User ChoiceGoogle is contesting a court ruling that found it holds an illegal monopoly in online search and text advertising, arguing that users choose its services voluntarily. The company is appealing the decision and seeking to delay data-sharing requirements with competitors, citing the potential exposure of trade secrets.
Read more »