Intel has won a significant victory in a legal battle that spanned nearly two decades, as the European Union’s Court of Justice ruled in its favour on Thursday. The court dismissed an appeal by the European Commission, which had accused the US chipmaker of anti-competitive practices aimed at undermining rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD).
The dispute centred on Intel offering rebates to major computer manufacturers, such as Dell, Hewlett-Packard, NEC, and Lenovo, for primarily using Intel chips. EU regulators had fined Intel €1.06 billion, arguing the rebates were intended to block AMD’s market share. However, Intel consistently challenged the fine, asserting that regulators failed to prove any anti-competitive impact from the rebates.
Earlier this year, Intel’s case gained momentum when a legal adviser indicated that EU regulators had not sufficiently conducted an economic analysis to support their claims. This led to the court’s final decision to overturn the fine, bringing the lengthy legal struggle to a close.
The competition between Elon Musk and Mukesh Ambani is intensifying as they vie for dominance in India’s emerging satellite broadband market. After India’s government decided to allocate satellite spectrum administratively, rather than through auction, the stage is set for a fierce battle. Musk’s Starlink, which uses low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellites, is poised to enter the Indian market, while Ambani’s Reliance Jio has already partnered with Luxembourg-based SES, utilising medium-Earth orbit (MEO) satellites.
The stakes are high as satellite broadband promises to bring internet access to remote areas of India, helping to bridge the country’s digital divide. Both billionaires have taken opposing views on how the spectrum should be allocated, with Ambani pushing for an auction, while Musk argues for the administrative model, aligning with international standards. India’s telecom regulator has yet to announce spectrum pricing, but projections indicate that satellite internet could reach two million subscribers by 2025.
This rivalry underscores the vast potential of the Indian market, where nearly 40% of the population still lacks internet access. Both Musk and Ambani are vying to capture this untapped segment, but pricing will be critical, especially in a country where mobile data is among the cheapest globally. Analysts predict a price war, with Musk’s deep pockets potentially giving Starlink a competitive edge, though challenges remain due to Starlink’s higher costs compared to local providers.
Apple CEO Tim Cook met with China’s Minister for Industry and Information Technology, Jin Zhuanglong, during his recent visit to Beijing. During the meeting, Jin expressed hopes that Apple would continue expanding its presence in China, increasing innovation investments, and collaborating with Chinese companies. Apple has not commented on the meeting.
This visit marks Cook’s second trip to China in 2023. While in Beijing, he visited local sites and engaged with Chinese artists, as seen in his posts on the social media platform Weibo. Cook’s trip comes at a time when Apple faces increased competition in the Chinese smartphone market, particularly from domestic rival Huawei.
Apple launched its latest iPhones in China on September 20, the same day Huawei released its competing model. While early iPhone sales saw a 20% increase compared to the previous year, overall sales declined by 2% due to decreased interest in older models and the growing popularity of Huawei’s Mate and Pura series.
India is set to introduce new restrictions on the import of laptops, tablets, and personal computers starting in January, aiming to boost domestic manufacturing. This move could significantly impact the country’s IT hardware market, valued between $8 billion and $10 billion, which currently relies heavily on imports. The Indian government hopes to shift more production locally through this initiative, which is expected to reshape the industry.
The country previously attempted to limit imports of such devices but faced backlash and pressure from international companies, particularly from the US. At present, companies can import laptops into India through a simple online registration system. However, India’s Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) is now developing a new system that will require prior authorisation for imports.
India’s IT hardware market, which is worth nearly $20 billion, depends on imports for two-thirds of its demand, with much of it coming from China. To encourage local production, the Indian government has offered $2.01 billion in subsidies, attracting interest from major manufacturers such as Acer, Dell, HP, and Lenovo. Many of these companies are reportedly preparing to begin local manufacturing under India’s production incentive program.
Dow Jones and the New York Post have taken legal action against AI startup Perplexity AI, accusing the company of unlawfully copying their copyrighted content. The lawsuit is part of a wider dispute between publishers and tech companies over the use of news articles and other content without permission to train and operate AI systems.
Perplexity AI, which aims to disrupt the search engine market, assembles information from websites it deems authoritative and presents AI-generated summaries. Publishers claim that Perplexity bypasses their websites, depriving them of advertising and subscription revenue, and undermines the work of journalists.
The lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of New York, argues that Perplexity’s AI generates answers based on a vast database of news articles, often copying content verbatim. News Corp, owner of Dow Jones and the New York Post, is asking the court to block Perplexity’s use of its articles and to destroy any databases containing copyrighted material.
Perplexity has also faced allegations from other media organisations, including Forbes and Wired. While the company has introduced a revenue-sharing programme with some publishers, many news outlets continue to resist, seeking stronger legal protections for their content.
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump revealed that he spoke with Apple CEO Tim Cook about the financial penalties imposed on the tech giant by the European Union. Trump claimed that Cook informed him about a recent $15 billion fine from the EU, along with an additional $2 billion penalty, although Apple has not confirmed the details of the call.
The EU is investigating major tech companies to limit their influence and promote fair competition for smaller businesses. Recently, Apple encountered major challenges, including a court ruling that required the company to pay about $14 billion in back taxes to Ireland. Additionally, Apple was hit with a $2 billion antitrust fine for allegedly restricting competition in the music streaming sector via its App Store.
During the podcast with Patrick Bet-David, Trump expressed his commitment to protect American companies from what he described as unfair treatment. He stated, ‘Tim, I got to get elected first. But I’m not going to let them take advantage of our companies.’ Trump and Democrat Kamala Harris are currently in a tight race for the 5 November presidential election.
The authors make several points relevant to the global AI discussions. First, as AI becomes integral to the global economy, warning echo of the looming threat of concentrated corporate control, which risks stifling innovation, compromising consumer privacy, and undermining democratic values. To combat it, the authors advocate for a diverse AI market that includes public, private, and non-profit stakeholders to ensure the technology’s benefits are widely distributed.
In "Stopping Big Tech from Becoming Big AI" we lay out a series of detailed, practical measures to check rising market concentration and keep AI open for all 🧵 pic.twitter.com/gaHjwHwLYL
Second, the report mentions monopolistic risks, through tactics such as exclusive partnerships and control over computing power that allow dominant firms to consolidate power, restricting competition and innovation. Despite often being unseen by consumers, these practices could centralise AI development and inhibit market diversity. As an action point, the authors call on governments to act swiftly using existing regulatory tools, such as blocking mergers and enforcing ex-ante competition policies, to dismantle these barriers and impose fair access rules on essential AI resources.
Finally, international cooperation is one of the key points, particularly the importance of recognising the global nature of AI development. Authors warn against repeating past mistakes of digital market dominance, emphasising the need for a unified approach to AI regulation. Through fostering competition, the report asserts that AI can deliver broader societal benefits, prioritising innovation and privacy over profit maximisation and surveillance.
Why does it matter?
The global community sees the current moment as a pivotal chance to shape AI’s future for the collective good, urging immediate regulatory intervention. Echoing this approach, this report aims to ensure that AI remains a competitive field characterised by transparency and fairness, safeguarding a digital economy that benefits all stakeholders equally.
Governments around the world are scrambling to establish protections surrounding AI development and use, according to Doreen Bogdan-Martin, Secretary-General of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Speaking at a regulatory conference, she noted that only 15% of ITU’s 194 member states have begun developing policies in this area, leaving the vast majority without regulatory frameworks for AI.
Martin pointed out that many countries are eager to join discussions and learn from others that have advanced in AI regulation. She highlighted India‘s success in building a digital public infrastructure, particularly its unified payments interface and Aadhaar digital identity system, calling the country a global leader in this space. India’s fast 5G network has also positioned it as a key player in the digital economy.
Reflecting on past regulatory efforts to improve internet access, Martin explained that regulators today face a more complex landscape. AI’s integration with telecoms is a particular area of focus, as policymakers consider how to regulate in a world where digital infrastructure is increasingly interconnected.
Martin also stressed the growing challenges posed by cyberattacks, which are rising 80% year on year, and the risks posed by AI-driven deepfakes and disinformation. Strengthening network resilience and ensuring global participation in the digital economy remain critical concerns.
Many EU member states are set to miss the October 17 deadline to implement the Network and Information Security Directive (NIS 2), aimed at enhancing cybersecurity for critical sectors. Only Belgium, Croatia, Italy, and Lithuania have made partial progress, while others like Germany and the Netherlands have pending legislation, and countries such as Ireland and Spain lag further behind. The directive, approved in 2022, expands protections for sectors like energy, transport, banking, and water, and replaces the previous NIS1 directive, which failed to boost cyber resilience.
Businesses are concerned about the fragmented implementation and compliance challenges, particularly for companies operating across multiple markets. The European Federation of National Associations of Water Services (EurEau) warned that delays create uncertainty for water operators, who may need financial support to meet cybersecurity requirements. Similarly, the software lobby group BSA criticised the lack of guidance on incident reporting, a key aspect of NIS 2.
The European DIGITAL SME Alliance expressed worries for small and medium enterprises that might be impacted if they are part of larger companies’ supply chains under NIS 2. The directive mandates penalties for non-compliance, including fines of up to €10 million or 2% of global revenue, and holds senior management accountable for security breaches, signaling a shift in responsibility beyond IT departments.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has released a significant Statement of Interest, urging scrutiny of surveys and information exchanges managed by trade associations. The DOJ expressed concerns that such exchanges may create unique risks to competition, particularly when competitors share sensitive information exclusively among themselves.
According to the DOJ, antitrust laws will evaluate the context of any information exchange to determine its potential impact on competition. Sharing competitively sensitive information could disproportionately benefit participating companies at the expense of consumers, workers, and other stakeholders. The department noted that advancements in AI technology have intensified these concerns, allowing large amounts of detailed information to be exchanged quickly, potentially heightening the risk of anticompetitive behaviour.
This guidance follows the DOJ’s withdrawal of long-standing rules that established “safety zones” for information exchanges, which previously indicated that certain types of sharing were presumed lawful. By retracting this guidance, the DOJ signals a shift toward a more cautious, case-by-case approach, urging businesses to prioritise proactive risk management.
The DOJ’s statement, made in relation to an antitrust case in the pork industry, has wider implications for various sectors, including real estate. It highlights the need for organisations, such as Multiple Listing Services (MLS) and trade associations, to evaluate their practices and avoid environments that could lead to price-fixing or other anticompetitive behaviours. The DOJ encourages trade association executives to review their information-sharing protocols, educate members on legal risks, and monitor practices to ensure compliance with antitrust laws.
