Google and Amazon reportedly face a Federal Trade Commission probe over whether they are misleading companies that buy ads on their websites.The FTC, led by Republican chairman Andrew Ferguson, is looking into whether the Big Tech giants have been transparent about the terms and pricing of their ad deals, Bloomberg reported, citing unnamed sources.For Amazon, FTC officials want information on Amazon’s auction process and whether it informed clients about its “reserve pricing” for some ads – which refers to ...

Core Points - A US federal jury has ordered Google to pay approximately $425 million for illegally collecting data from smartphone app usage despite users opting for privacy settings [3][4][5] - The lawsuit, initiated in July 2020, accused Google of intercepting and selling users' mobile app activity data regardless of their privacy choices [4][5][6] - Google plans to appeal the jury's decision, asserting that its privacy tools respect user choices [5][6] Legal Context - The jury's verdict follows a trial in San Francisco and comes after a federal judge recently ruled in favor of Google in a separate antitrust case [4] - The plaintiffs' attorneys claimed that Google's actions violated consumer privacy rights [4][6] Regulatory Environment - France's data protection authority, CNIL, has imposed significant fines on Google for failing to comply with cookie consent laws, including a recent fine of €325 million (approximately $375 million) [8] - This fine is part of a series of penalties against Google for cookie-related violations, totaling €100 million in 2020 and €150 million in 2021 [9]

Group 1: Apple and Berkshire Hathaway - Apple has been Berkshire Hathaway's top holding for several years, despite Warren Buffett's historical avoidance of tech stocks [1] - Buffett prefers sectors with predictable cash flows, such as insurance, banking, and consumer staples, due to the unpredictable nature of tech earnings [2] Group 2: Alphabet - Alphabet has a strong economic moat, with Google holding over 90% market share in web search for the last two decades, supporting its profitable tech empire [5] - Google Search has reached a revenue run rate of $200 billion, with Google Services operating at a margin of over 40%, and revenue grew by 12% in the first quarter [6][7] - Despite its competitive advantages and growth, Alphabet trades at a price-to-earnings ratio of 18.6, which is a substantial discount compared to the S&P 500 [7] - The valuation discount is attributed to fears of potential breakup or fines due to its monopoly status and the risk of disruption from AI chatbots [8] - Historically, Alphabet shares have traded at modest valuations, indicating that investors may have underestimated the stock [9] Group 3: Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (TSMC) - Berkshire Hathaway invested $4.1 billion in TSMC in 2022 but sold its position two quarters later, possibly due to geopolitical risks [10] - TSMC is the leading third-party semiconductor manufacturer, holding over 50% market share in contract chips and over 90% in advanced chips crucial for AI [11] - Advanced chip technologies accounted for 73% of TSMC's total wafer revenue in the first quarter, showcasing its significant market position [11] - TSMC's revenue grew by 35% in the first quarter to $25.5 billion, with an operating margin of 48.5%, indicating strong pricing power [12] - The stock trades at a price-to-earnings ratio of 24, which is considered an excellent valuation for a rapidly growing company integral to the AI boom [13]

Core Viewpoint - Google is under investigation by the Justice Department for potential antitrust violations related to its partnership with Character.AI, particularly concerning the structuring of a deal to avoid regulatory scrutiny [1][3]. Group 1: Investigation Details - The DOJ is examining whether Google intentionally structured its deal with Character.AI to evade regulatory oversight [1]. - Google has not been accused of any wrongdoing, and the investigation is in its early stages, which may not lead to enforcement actions [3]. - The partnership involved Google hiring key members from Character.AI, including co-founders, and obtaining a non-exclusive license for its chatbot technology [1][3]. Group 2: Character.AI Legal Issues - Character.AI is facing a wrongful death lawsuit related to the suicide of a teenager, alleging that its chatbot led to an emotionally abusive relationship [4]. - A federal judge has allowed this lawsuit to proceed, rejecting Character.AI's First Amendment defense [5]. Group 3: Broader Context and Implications - The DOJ is considering the long-term implications of Google's AI products in relation to its monopoly over search [8]. - Comparisons have been made between Google's deal with Character.AI and "acqui-hire" transactions, which are scrutinized for potentially neutralizing competition [8][9]. - Google has previously lost two significant antitrust cases, with potential remedies including a breakup of the company [5].

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) is advocating for Google to divest two of its digital advertising businesses, Ad Exchange (AdX) and DFP publisher ad server, following a federal judge's ruling that Google holds an illegal monopoly in the ad tech sector [1][2][4]. Group 1: DOJ's Proposals - The DOJ argues that Google should be required to sell off AdX and conduct a "phased divestiture" of its DFP publisher ad server to restore competition in the digital advertising market [1][2]. - The DOJ's filing emphasizes that these remedies are essential to terminate Google's monopolies and prevent future violations [3]. - A court-appointed official would supervise the divestiture process, allowing the DOJ to approve or reject potential buyers [3]. Group 2: Legal Proceedings and Implications - U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema has scheduled a trial for September 22 to discuss the remedies for Google's monopolistic practices [4]. - The DOJ indicated that a forced sale could take several years to finalize, highlighting the complexity of the divestiture process [4]. - Google's parent company, Alphabet, generated approximately $350 billion in revenue in fiscal 2024, with a significant portion derived from digital advertising, making any breakup potentially disruptive to its business [6]. Group 3: Google's Response - Google has expressed intentions to appeal the case, arguing that the DOJ's proposed remedies are excessively severe and may not be legally permissible [7]. - The company contends that a forced sale could undermine the tools that advertisers use to connect with publishers and effectively reach their audiences [11]. - Google has shown openness to behavioral remedies, such as sharing relevant ad data with competitors, while facing a separate potential breakup of its search business [14].

Google operates illegal monopolies over two separate markets related to digital advertising technology, a federal judge ruled on Thursday – dealing the Big Tech giant another historic antitrust loss that could result in a breakup of its online empire.The bombshell ruling by US District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia federal court determined that Google violated the Sherman Act by dominating the online publisher ad server market and the ad-exchange market that connects ad buyers to sellers.“Google further ...

Core Points - Google has reversed its policy that prohibited employees from discussing the ongoing antitrust lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, following a settlement with the Alphabet Workers Union [1][2][4] - The U.S. Department of Justice filed an antitrust lawsuit against Google in 2020, alleging the company maintained its market share through strong barriers to entry [3] - The reversal of the policy is seen as a significant victory for Google employees, who have faced increased censorship on various topics since 2019 [2][8] Company Policy Changes - Google announced it will not enforce broad rules that restrict employees' rights to comment on the antitrust lawsuit and its potential impact on employment conditions [4][7] - The settlement with the Alphabet Workers Union emphasizes that employees have the right to discuss their employment and union activities without interference from the company [7][8] Legal Context - A U.S. District Court judge ruled in August that Google held an illegal monopoly in the search market, and the company plans to appeal this decision [6] - The DOJ is considering structural remedies, including the potential breakup of Google's Chrome web browser, which is argued to provide an unfair advantage in the search market [5][6] Union Involvement - The Alphabet Workers Union filed an unfair labor practice charge against Google, claiming that a directive from Google's president to refrain from commenting on the case was overly broad [6][8] - Union representatives believe that the outcomes of the upcoming remedies trial could significantly affect wages, working conditions, and employment terms for Google employees [9]