Google fights DOJ push to break up ad tech business as antitrust trial opens

/in /tarafından

Alphabet’s Google is back in court, facing a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) bid to force it to divest parts of its online advertising empire. The antitrust trial, which opened Monday in Alexandria, Virginia, could reshape the digital ad market if the government succeeds.

The DOJ and a coalition of states want Google to sell its ad exchange AdX, which charges publishers a 20% fee to auction ads in real time, and to make the auction’s decision-making mechanism open source. Prosecutors argue that only structural remedies like divestiture can address Google’s illegal monopolization, after U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled earlier this year that Google unlawfully tied AdX to its publisher ad server.

“Leaving Google with the motive and the means to recreate that tie is simply too great a risk,” DOJ attorney Julia Tarver Wood said in opening statements.

Google’s lawyer Karen Dunn pushed back, calling the proposals “radical and reckless,” claiming they would harm competition by giving regulators “broad and unparalleled power” over a major tech platform. Instead, Google has offered policy changes that would make it easier for publishers to work with rivals — but the DOJ insists such tweaks are insufficient.

The trial follows a recent DOJ loss in a separate search monopoly case, where a Washington, D.C. judge refused to impose most of the government’s remedies. But prosecutors argue this case is different, since ad tech is the monopoly itself rather than just a distribution method.

Industry stakeholders are closely watching the outcome. Grant Whitmore of Advance Local, which runs local news outlets in eight states, testified that Google’s control of advertiser tools, publisher tools, and the AdX exchange “offers a lot of opportunities for Google to continue to put their thumb on the scale.” He said Google should also be forced to sell its publisher ad server.

Google has previously floated selling AdX to settle an EU investigation, according to Reuters, and internal documents from those talks may surface during this trial.

The case is part of a broader bipartisan effort to curb Big Tech power, with ongoing actions against Meta, Amazon, and Apple. The stakes are high: a forced breakup of Google’s ad tech stack would mark one of the most significant antitrust interventions in the digital economy’s history.

Amazon sues New York over new labor law, calling it unconstitutional power grab

/in /tarafından

Amazon has filed a lawsuit against the New York State Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), seeking to block enforcement of a new state law that it argues illegally intrudes on federal authority over private sector labor disputes.

The law, Senate Bill 8034A, was signed by Governor Kathy Hochul on September 5. She defended it as necessary to protect workers amid a backlog at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which has been paralyzed since President Donald Trump removed Democratic member Gwynne Wilcox in January, leaving the agency without a quorum.

Amazon’s complaint, filed in Brooklyn federal court, claims the law is unconstitutional because it allows PERB to claim jurisdiction over union organizing, collective bargaining, and workplace disputes—areas traditionally overseen by the NLRB. “New York has created the collision of state and federal authority Congress sought to avoid,” Amazon said in the filing.

The conflict became immediate when PERB filed a charge over the August 9 firing of Brima Sylla, a Staten Island warehouse worker and union vice president, even as the NLRB had already begun its own review.

The NLRB itself sued New York on September 12, also seeking to block enforcement of the law, with Acting General Counsel William Cowen arguing that federal law preempts state measures regardless of the board’s quorum status.

With 1.56 million employees worldwide, Amazon has been a frequent flashpoint in labor disputes. The case could set an important precedent for whether states can temporarily step into labor oversight roles when the NLRB is gridlocked.

SAP offers concessions to EU in effort to ease antitrust concerns

/in /tarafından

SAP, Europe’s largest software maker, has proposed concessions to the European Commission in an attempt to head off a potential antitrust investigation and fines, sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

The German company dominates the enterprise resource planning (ERP) market, providing software that helps firms manage finances, supply chains, HR, and procurement. SAP has long been under scrutiny from EU regulators following complaints about complex licensing terms, the bundling of applications, and difficulties faced by companies trying to switch to rival suppliers.

According to sources, SAP has submitted a proposal aimed at addressing regulators’ concerns, though details of the remedies were not disclosed. If accepted, SAP could avoid a formal investigation and a penalty that could reach up to 10% of its annual global revenue. Both SAP and the European Commission declined to comment.

The Commission previously circulated a 2022 questionnaire to SAP customers asking about their ability to switch to rival vendors, purchase only specific support services, or migrate from on-premise ERP systems to the cloud. The inquiry also raised questions about whether SAP or Oracle had disparaged competitors.

Potential remedies could include giving customers greater flexibility to purchase individual support contracts and lowering barriers to migration between vendors.

SAP also faces antitrust pressure in the United States: in June it asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review a ruling requiring it to face a lawsuit from Teradata, which accused the company of anti-competitive practices.

The EU’s decision on SAP’s concessions will determine whether the company averts another high-profile investigation as regulators increase scrutiny of dominant software vendors.