This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Credit: cottonbro studio from Pexels Of course, Google has an unlawful monopoly on online ads, as a federal judge found Thursday, just like a different federal judge found last year that Google has an unlawful monopoly on online searching; everyone knows that "googling" means online search. A market economy only works if there ...

Core Viewpoint - A federal judge ruled that Google maintained an illegal monopoly in advertising technology markets, which could significantly alter the online advertising landscape [2][4][5]. Summary by Relevant Sections Legal Ruling - Judge Leonie Brinkema found that Google illegally maintained a monopoly in publisher ad servers and ad exchanges, but not in advertiser ad networks [2][4]. - The ruling is part of ongoing legal challenges against Google, with a previous ruling in August confirming its monopoly in online search [5][8]. Impact on the Advertising Industry - The decision is expected to reshape the online advertising business, which is crucial for website publishers to fund content creation [3][4]. - Digital display advertising generates over $20 billion annually for U.S. publishers, highlighting the importance of competition in this sector [11]. Publisher and Advertiser Reactions - Publishers are optimistic about potentially receiving higher revenues, while advertisers may benefit from lower costs due to increased competition [6][15]. - The media industry has welcomed the ruling, arguing that Google's monopoly has limited competition and reduced ad revenue for publishers [5][15]. Google's Position and Response - Google plans to appeal the ruling and argues that it faces competition from various platforms, including social media and e-commerce [16][17]. - The company maintains that its ad tech tools are preferred by publishers due to their effectiveness and affordability [17]. Future Considerations - The judge has yet to decide on remedies that could include changes to Google's policies or potential divestitures of certain acquisitions [8][19]. - Antitrust experts suggest that while structural remedies are possible, they are less likely than other forms of intervention [20].

Core Viewpoint - Netflix has demonstrated strong performance in the first quarter of the year, surpassing analysts' expectations despite economic challenges posed by President Trump's policies [1][4]. Group 1: Subscriber Growth and Financial Performance - Netflix added 41 million subscribers globally last year, marking the largest annual gain in its 27-year history [2]. - The company has shifted its focus from reporting subscriber numbers to emphasizing profits, having surpassed 300 million global subscribers as of December [3]. - In Q1, Netflix reported earnings of $2.9 billion, or $6.61 per share, a 24% increase year-over-year, with revenue rising 13% to $10.54 billion, both exceeding forecasts [4]. Group 2: Market Context and Competitive Position - The tech industry has faced significant challenges due to tariffs and economic volatility, but Netflix's global streaming service has remained unaffected, leading to a 9% increase in its stock price this year [5][6]. - Netflix's shares rose nearly 3% in extended trading following the earnings report, indicating strong market confidence [6]. Group 3: Future Outlook and Consumer Sentiment - Netflix's co-CEO expressed confidence in the company's resilience, noting that its low-cost subscription option at $8 per month could help maintain consumer interest during economic downturns [9]. - The company reaffirmed its annual revenue prediction of approximately $44 billion, reflecting a 13% increase from 2024 [10].

Core Viewpoint - Infosys forecasts muted annual revenue growth due to increasing global uncertainty, suggesting clients may reduce tech spending [1][2] Revenue Forecast - Infosys expects revenue to remain flat or grow by up to 3% for the fiscal year ending March 2026 on a constant currency basis, which is below analyst estimates of 2-4% [2] - This forecast is lower than the previous year's constant-currency revenue growth of 4.2% [2] Market Context - The company earns over 80% of its revenue from Western markets, making it vulnerable to global economic conditions [2] - Infosys anticipated a demand revival in 2025 after a growth slowdown in 2024, but ongoing client spending weakness and trade tensions have clouded the outlook [3] Executive Insights - CEO Salil Parekh described the current environment as "uncertain" and emphasized the need for agility in execution [4] - CFO Jayesh Sanghrajka noted that the lower end of the sales forecast reflects increasing uncertainty, complicating the assessment of external factors like trade policies [4] Financial Performance - Infosys reported an 11.75% year-on-year drop in net profit for the March quarter, totaling 70.3 billion rupees ($823.5 million), which was below analyst projections [5] - Revenue for the three months ending March 31 increased by 7.9% to 409.25 billion rupees [6]

Core Viewpoint - A US judge has ruled that Google holds a monopoly in the online ad technology market, which may lead to significant changes in its operations, including potential divestiture of its ad exchange operations [3][4][5]. Group 1: Legal Context - The federal government and over a dozen US states have filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google, accusing it of illegal practices to dominate digital advertising sectors, including publisher ad servers, advertiser tools, and ad exchanges [4]. - This ruling is part of a broader government initiative to regulate Big Tech and could result in the breakup of Google [4][6]. Group 2: Market Impact - The judge's ruling indicates that Google has engaged in anticompetitive actions to maintain its monopoly in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets, which has harmed competitors and consumers [5][6]. - The ruling could have a profound impact on Google's revenue, as online advertising is a primary source of income that funds various free services like Maps and Gmail [7][8]. Group 3: Potential Remedies - Possible remedies being considered include ordering Google to spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations, which could alter the competitive landscape of online advertising [8][9]. - Attorneys have been given a week to propose schedules for discussing potential remedies, indicating that the legal process is ongoing and may extend to the Supreme Court [6][8].

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Silicon Valley chip maker Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) told regulators that the US might not grant newly required licenses for chips exported to China, hitting the company's bottom line. Chip developer Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) on Wednesday said it expects new US licensing requirements for semiconductors exported to China to ...

Core Argument - Mark Zuckerberg denied in court that Meta acquired Instagram and WhatsApp to eliminate competition, asserting that the purchases were based on their unique features and potential for growth [3][4][5]. Group 1: Acquisition Intent - Zuckerberg stated that Instagram was appealing for its camera and photo-sharing capabilities, but he did not see it as a direct competitor to Facebook [5]. - Regarding WhatsApp, Zuckerberg described its founders as "unambitious" and emphasized that he aimed to enhance the app's capabilities after the acquisition [5]. Group 2: Market Competition - Meta has faced increasing competition from various rivals, including Google, and has had to adapt to a rapidly evolving digital landscape [6]. - Sheryl Sandberg, former COO of Meta, highlighted that users have numerous choices for their online engagement, intensifying competition for attention [7]. Group 3: Regulatory Context - The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) argues that Meta holds a dominant position in the social networking market, while Meta's defense emphasizes the significant investments made to develop Instagram and WhatsApp into leading platforms [9]. - The case was initiated in December 2020, during the final days of the Trump administration, indicating a politically charged environment surrounding the antitrust issues [9]. Group 4: Competitive Threats - Zuckerberg identified TikTok as a major competitive threat, noting that it has surpassed both Facebook and Instagram in user engagement [11]. - In response to TikTok's popularity, Meta introduced a Reels feature to compete in the short video content space [11].

Group 1 - Meta will begin using public posts and comments from European users to train its generative AI models starting May 27, unless users opt out [2][3] - The data used for AI training will include content from Instagram photo captions and Facebook comments, while private messages on WhatsApp will be excluded [2][3] - Users will receive notifications about the policy change and an opt-out option before the May 27 deadline [3] Group 2 - Meta is prioritizing AI development, aiming to compete with the success of ChatGPT, and plans to invest between $60 billion to $65 billion this year in data centers, servers, and network infrastructure [4]

Core Viewpoint - Google is facing a £5 billion ($6.6 billion) legal claim in the UK from approximately 250,000 businesses, alleging overcharging for online advertising and abuse of its dominant market position [2][3]. Group 1: Legal Claims and Allegations - The law firm Geradin Partners has filed the claim with Britain's Competition Appeal Tribunal, asserting that Google has engaged in monopolistic practices to exclude competitors from the search and search advertising markets [2]. - The claim is based on Google's conduct since 2011, which is said to have led to billions of pounds in overcharges for UK advertisers [3]. - This lawsuit is the first of its kind in the UK aimed specifically at compensating businesses for inflated advertising costs on Google [4]. Group 2: Ongoing Investigations and Regulatory Scrutiny - The UK's Competition and Markets Authority is investigating Google's dominance in the search-engine market, which may result in the company being designated "strategic market status" under new UK regulations [7]. - A similar class action lawsuit was filed in 2023, seeking £7 billion in compensation for consumers, indicating a broader concern over Google's pricing practices [4]. - Last year, a £13.6 billion claim was also filed against Google for alleged anti-competitive behavior in digital advertising [4].

Core Insights - Nvidia faces a new US licensing requirement for exporting its H20 graphics processing units (GPUs) to China due to concerns that these chips may be used in supercomputers [2][3] - The company anticipates a financial impact of approximately $5.5 billion in the current fiscal quarter due to this licensing requirement, which affects inventory, purchase commitments, and related reserves [5][4] - The licensing requirement for H20 chips is expected to last indefinitely, adding to the existing restrictions on Nvidia's most advanced GPUs tailored for artificial intelligence [4][6] Financial Impact - Nvidia expects to incur charges of up to $5.5 billion in the first quarter results related to H20 products [5] - The current fiscal quarter for Nvidia ends on April 27, which may reflect the immediate financial consequences of the new licensing rule [4] Market Reaction - Following the announcement of the licensing requirement, Nvidia's shares experienced a decline of over 6% in after-market trading [3] - The overall market has shown volatility since the announcement of tariffs by US President Donald Trump, with a sharp decline followed by a partial recovery due to a temporary pause on tariff increases [7] Strategic Context - Nvidia's CEO has emphasized the company's commitment to balancing legal compliance with technological advancements, despite the challenges posed by US-China trade tensions [6] - The US government views China as a strategic competitor in technology, leading to restrictions on the sale of advanced AI chips to the country [6]