Core Viewpoint - Epic Games and Spotify are testing Apple's new App Store policies by submitting apps that were previously restricted, indicating a shift in the competitive landscape of app distribution [1][5]. Group 1: Epic Games - The submission of a new version of Fortnite could lead to its return to the App Store after being removed in 2020 due to a challenge against Apple's payment rules [2]. - Epic Games' actions are part of a broader strategy to enhance its revenue streams following a legal ruling that required Apple to modify its App Store policies [5][8]. Group 2: Spotify - Spotify aims to enable users to purchase individual audiobooks directly and allow Premium subscribers to buy additional hours for audiobook listening, reflecting a shift towards more flexible monetization options [3]. - The recent approval of Spotify's updates follows Apple's acceptance of similar changes in other apps, indicating a trend towards more competitive practices in the App Store [3][5]. Group 3: Industry Implications - The new App Store policies are expected to encourage more apps to adopt innovative business models, potentially benefiting larger tech companies while posing challenges for smaller developers [4]. - Apple's previous requirement for developers to seek permission for linking to external payment options has been relaxed, allowing for greater flexibility in payment processing without additional commissions [7][8].

Apple requested that a federal appeals court temporarily pause a district judge's ruling requiring it to allow more competition in the Apple App Store, arguing it will suffer irreparable harm if the decision isn't paused. A district court judge ordered Apple to ease restrictions on app developers after holding Apple in contempt of an order issued in a 2020 antitrust lawsuit that was brought by Epic Games, the creator of the video game Fortnite. Among those was a 27% fee that Apple assessed on app developers ...

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: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain Google last year began offering some artificial intelligence firms a way to anchor chatbot responses in its search results, but still reserves key features for its own AI service, Gemini, a company executive testified. Liz Reid, Google's head of search, was describing in court Tuesday how the ...

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is proposing that Google divest two of its advertising products to restore competition in the ad tech sector following a court ruling that found Google guilty of maintaining monopoly power in the digital advertising space [1][2]. Group 1: DOJ Proposals - The DOJ's filing suggests that Google should sell its ad exchange product AdX and conduct a phased sale of DoubleClick for Publishers, an ad server for website publishers [2]. - The DOJ also proposes that Google refrain from operating an ad exchange for 10 years after the sale of AdX [2]. - The filing emphasizes the need for Google to open its ad buying tools, including AdWords, to work with all third-party ad tech products on non-discriminatory terms [4]. Group 2: Allegations Against Google - The DOJ alleges that Google has ensured significant revenue losses for publishers that do not use AdX, thereby creating a monopoly by integrating AdX and DFP [3]. - The filing describes the proposed remedies as necessary to terminate Google's monopolies and reintroduce competition into the ad exchange and publisher ad server markets [4]. Group 3: Google's Response - In response to the DOJ's proposals, Google's VP of regulatory affairs stated that the measures would harm publishers and advertisers, arguing that the DOJ's additional proposals exceed the court's findings [5]. - Google has proposed its own remedies, including making AdX real-time bids available to all third-party ad servers and having its actions monitored by an independent compliance observer for three years [8]. Group 4: Broader Antitrust Context - Google is facing antitrust pressure from multiple fronts, including a separate case where the U.S. government is seeking to compel the company to sell its Chrome browser due to findings of monopoly power in the online search market [8].

Core Points - Apple has appealed a ruling by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, which found that the company violated a court order related to competition in the App Store [1] - The judge emphasized that Apple's attempts to interfere with competition are unacceptable and that the ruling is an injunction, not a negotiation [2] - The judge accused Apple of adopting lies and misrepresentations in court regarding its commission policy [3] Financial Impact - The financial implications of the ruling are uncertain, particularly regarding whether companies like Epic Games and Spotify can persuade Apple customers to transact directly with them [5] - Bank of America indicated that if the ruling does not favor Apple, it could impact "billions" of dollars in high-margin revenue [5] Regulatory Challenges - Apple is also facing regulatory scrutiny in Europe concerning the App Store and an antitrust investigation by the Department of Justice [6]

Core Viewpoint - Apple has filed an appeal against a US judge's ruling that mandates the company to open its App Store to increased competition, following a contempt finding related to a previous antitrust lawsuit initiated by Epic Games [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The appeal will be submitted to the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, challenging the April 30 ruling that found Apple in contempt of a 2021 injunction aimed at facilitating developers in directing consumers to cheaper non-Apple payment options [1][2]. - Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers stated that Apple willfully failed to comply with the injunction, which was intended to promote competition and consumer choice [2][5]. - The judge has referred Apple and one of its executives to federal prosecutors for a potential criminal contempt investigation, citing deliberate delays and misleading actions by Apple [4]. Group 2: Financial Implications - The ruling highlights Apple's efforts to maintain a revenue stream worth billions, which the judge claims is in direct defiance of the court's injunction [5]. - Apple imposed a new 27% fee on app developers for transactions completed outside the App Store, which was identified as a tactic to circumvent the injunction [7]. Group 3: Background of the Lawsuit - The antitrust lawsuit initiated by Epic Games, the developer of Fortnite, seeks to challenge Apple's control over app transactions and distribution on its iOS operating system [6]. - The judge's order also prohibits Apple from using "scare screens" to dissuade consumers from opting for third-party payment methods [7].

欧盟委员会副主席：微软已经承诺遵守欧洲的规定 金十数据5月5日讯，欧盟委员会副主席特里萨·里贝拉周一表示，微软(MSFT.O)董事长布拉德·史密斯告 诉欧盟委员会，无论是否同意，微软都将遵守欧盟的规定。在与记者的聊天中，里贝拉说："我认为， 更有价值的做法是承认，如果我们想在这个市场经营，就必须遵守规则，我们要尊重规则，而不是简单 地说'你们针对我是因为我是美国人'。"微软上月表示在全球范围内将其聊天和视频应用Teams与Office 软件分开销售。六个月前，微软在欧洲将这两款产品分开销售，以避免欧盟潜在的反垄断罚款。 ...

1.FY25Q2业绩略超预期、主因规避关税政策而提前备货 营收954亿美元，YoY+5.1%，预期945亿。指引FQ3营收增速低至中个位数%。EPS 1.65美元，预期1.62 美元。产品收入687亿，YoY+2.7%；iPhone收入468亿，YoY+1.9%；据IDC，由于iPhone16e推出以及关 税前备货，25Q1 iPhone出货量5790万(YoY+10%）。大中华区营收160亿美元，YoY-2.3%。 2.股东回报 现金股息提高4%至每股0.26美元，董事会新增批准1000亿美元额度回购计划。 3.焦点1）苹果AI更新延期、未说明Siri的升级时间表 承认苹果仍需更多时间研发具备AI功能的Siri。数据中心及基座模型自建之外也使用第三方。此前在中 国区，阿里巴巴与苹果就AI业务达成合作。 焦点2）明确关税影响以及供应链本地化计划 除却苹果的提前采购，期间初、末的渠道库存相当，并未看到显著证据表明终端需求被提前释放； 基于当前关税条件，预计FQ3(4-6月)成本增加9亿（FQ2的产品成本为440亿），毛利率45.5%-46.5% （FQ2毛利率47.1%）； FQ3在美国市场销售的大多数iPho ...

Core Points - The U.S. government's remedies trial in the Google antitrust case regarding its advertising technology is set to begin on September 22 [1] - U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled that Google is liable for "willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power" in online advertising markets [2] - The court found that Google has maintained its monopoly through contractual policies and technological integration between its publisher ad server and ad exchange [3] - An August ruling determined that Google holds a monopoly in internet search, marking a significant antitrust ruling in the tech industry [4] - U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta concluded that Google is a monopolist and has acted to maintain its monopoly in the search market [5] - Google faces challenges not only from antitrust allegations but also from increasing competition in the generative AI market from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic [6]

Daniel Ek, co-founder and chief executive officer of Spotify Technology SA, during the Acquired LIVE event at the Chase Center in San Francisco, California, US, on Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2024.Spotify on Friday said Apple has approved the company's U.S. app update, which will allow users to access pricing information, links to make purchases and select from more payment options within the music streaming app.The approval comes after a U.S. federal judge on Wednesday ordered Apple to stop imposing the commissions ...