Google’s advertising business has faced renewed scrutiny in the EU, with a recent proposal to sell its advertising marketplace, AdX, being rejected by European publishers. The tech giant offered the sale to resolve an antitrust investigation by the EU, which accuses Google of favouring its services. The investigation followed complaints from the European Publishers Council, and the European Commission has since charged Google with anti-competitive practices.
Publishers dismissed Google’s offer as insufficient, arguing that the sale of AdX alone would not address the broader conflicts of interest due to Google’s dominance across the entire adtech supply chain. These industry insiders suggest that more drastic measures may be needed to curb Google’s influence, but the EU has not yet demanded such extensive divestments.
Google, meanwhile, maintains that the Commission’s claims are based on a misinterpretation of the competitive nature of the advertising sector. Despite facing similar antitrust trials in the US over its advertising technology, the company continues to defend its business practices, where authorities have called for selling its Ad Manager product.
AdX, which allows publishers to auction unsold ad space to advertisers in real time, has become a key component in the ongoing investigation. The EU antitrust chief Margrethe Vestager previously suggested Google divest additional tools to resolve the issue. However, experts believe the Commission may first issue a simpler ruling to halt Google’s current practices before escalating to demands for asset sales.
With advertising contributing to 77% of Google’s $237.85 billion revenue in 2023, the company’s dominant position in digital advertising remains a central point of contention in the EU and globally.
Meta Platforms has secured a legal victory after a US court dismissed a lawsuit accusing the tech giant of misleading shareholders about the impact of Apple’s privacy changes on its advertising business. The suit, brought by Israeli insurers and pension funds, claimed Meta concealed how Apple’s iOS privacy updates would diminish the effectiveness of ads on Facebook and Instagram, harming the company’s ad revenue.
The plaintiffs argued that Meta’s stock value dropped 53% within a year, wiping out over $500 billion in market value as the truth about Apple’s changes came to light. However, US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled that Meta’s eventual admission of a $10 billion financial hit in 2022 due to Apple’s policy didn’t prove that earlier disclosures were misleading or fraudulent.
In addition to the privacy claims, the lawsuit also alleged Meta had concealed former COO Sheryl Sandberg’s use of company resources for personal projects, including her wedding and book. The judge rejected these accusations, noting they were based on unverified media reports. Claims that Meta’s transition to Reels, a short-form video format inspired by TikTok, negatively impacted the company’s financial performance were also dismissed for lack of evidence.
Judge Rogers’ ruling effectively closes the case, dismissing it with prejudice, meaning it cannot be refiled. Meta and its top executives, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg and CFO Susan Li, have denied the allegations throughout the legal battle. Meta and the plaintiffs’ lawyers have not commented on the court’s decision.
Google is facing a billionaire lawsuit in London as Alphabet, its parent company, asked a tribunal to dismiss claims accusing the tech giant of abusing its dominance in the online search market. The lawsuit, which could amount to £7 billion ($9.3 billion), focuses on businesses’ costs when using Google’s search advertising services, which plaintiffs argue are ultimately passed on to consumers. The legal challenge is one of several targeting Google’s practices in recent years, including a similar case in Britain concerning its advertising market dominance and an ongoing antitrust trial in the United States.
Consumer rights advocate Nikki Stopford, representing the class of claimants, argues that Google’s overwhelming market presence allows it to increase costs unfairly. Her lawsuit also points to a €4.5 billion fine imposed by the European Commission in 2018 over Google’s restrictions on Android manufacturers, a decision currently being appealed. Furthermore, the lawsuit accuses Google of striking a deal with Apple to make its search engine the default on Apple’s Safari browser in exchange for a portion of mobile search ad revenues.
Google has dismissed these claims as unfounded. Its lawyer, Meredith Pickford, stated that the case is flawed, rejecting the notion that Google’s practices harmed consumers. Pickford also emphasised that Google’s agreement with Apple was legally sound and argued that the European Commission’s ruling was based on technicalities rather than substantive issues. The tribunal’s decision on whether the case will proceed to trial remains pending.
MicroStrategy has announced plans for its third debt offering this year, aiming to raise $700 million by issuing convertible senior notes due in 2028. The company intends to use the funds to pay off $500 million in existing senior secured notes and purchase more Bitcoin, with any remaining proceeds going towards general corporate purposes. The notes will be unsecured and will begin paying interest from March 2025, available only to qualified institutional buyers.
This marks MicroStrategy’s third debt offering in 2024, following similar issuances in March and June. The company, one of the largest public holders of Bitcoin, currently holds 244,800 BTC, valued at approximately $14 billion. However, the volatility of its Bitcoin holdings has affected its financial performance, with the company posting a net loss of $102.6 million in the second quarter of 2024, largely driven by a $180.1 million digital asset impairment.
Despite concerns about its significant exposure to Bitcoin, MicroStrategy’s stock has performed well. Its share price has surged nearly 295% over the past year, with a 96% increase so far in 2024, reaching $134 as of 16 September.
Google secured a significant victory on Wednesday, overturning a €1.49 billion ($1.66 billion) fine imposed by the European Commission in 2019. The fine, levied over antitrust violations, accused Google of abusing its dominance in online search advertising by restricting websites from using advertising brokers other than its AdSense platform. These practices, deemed illegal by the Commission, were said to have spanned from 2006 to 2016.
The General Court of Luxembourg, while agreeing with most of the European Commission’s findings, annulled the hefty fine. The judges ruled that the Commission had not fully considered all factors, particularly the duration of the unfair contractual clauses, which played a critical role in overturning the penalty. Despite the annulment, the ruling upheld many of the Commission’s assessments, but the financial punishment did not hold.
The fine was one of three that have cost Google a combined total of €8.25 billion in antitrust penalties, triggered by complaints from rivals such as Microsoft. Google noted that it had already revised the contracts in question in 2016 before the Commission’s decision.
The legal victory for Google comes just a week after it lost a separate case involving a €2.42 billion fine for unfairly promoting its price comparison service. While the battle over its advertising practices may have seen a favourable outcome, the tech giant’s ongoing legal challenges in Europe reflect the broader scrutiny facing major digital platforms across the continent.
Facebook’s owner company, Meta, is bracing for a substantial fine from the European Union, according to sources familiar with the matter. The penalty stems from allegations that Meta is leveraging its dominance in social networking to stifle competition in the classified advertising sector. The company’s practice of linking its free Marketplace service with Facebook has raised concerns among the EU regulators, who view this strategy as an attempt to edge out rivals.
The decision is expected as soon as next month, and it could be one of the final significant moves overseen by the EU’s current competition chief, Margrethe Vestager, before her departure. The investigation into Meta’s business practices marks a continuation of the EU’s broader efforts to crack down on the monopolistic behaviour of tech giants.
Currently, neither Meta nor the EU regulators have commented on the looming decision. However, this case could signal a more stringent approach to maintaining a level playing field in the digital marketplace, where tech companies have long held considerable power. The ruling could have substantial financial and operational consequences for Meta, potentially setting the tone for future regulatory actions in the tech industry.
The Biden administration is proposing new rules that could raise the cost of shipping goods from Chinese e-commerce platforms like Shein and Temu to the US. The aim is to crack down on the ‘de minimis exception,’ which currently allows products under $800 to be shipped duty-free. Biden has pointed out a surge in shipments using this exception, jumping from 140 million annually a decade ago to over 1 billion, mostly from Chinese platforms.
The new rules would block duty-free shipments of tariffed goods and require e-commerce platforms to provide more detailed information, such as the 10-digit tariff code. Both Shein and Temu have defended their practices, emphasising their commitment to affordable products and compliance with import rules. However, US safety regulators are pushing for investigations into product safety on these platforms.
The proposal follows warnings from the US-China Economic and Security Committee, which argues that platforms like Shein are using loopholes to outcompete US companies. Biden has vowed to explore further actions to protect American workers and strengthen enforcement against illegal imports.
Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, is likely to avoid being subjected to the EU’s stringent new tech regulations aimed at curbing the power of Big Tech. The company is expected to fall outside the scope of the Digital Markets Act (DMA), which imposes strict rules on firms that act as key intermediaries between businesses and consumers.
The European Commission investigated X in May, exploring whether the platform met the criteria to be classified as a ‘gatekeeper’ under the DMA. To qualify, a company must have over 45 million active users and a market capitalisation of at least €75 billion. Gatekeepers must open their messaging apps to rival services, allow users more control over pre-installed apps, and avoid giving preferential treatment to their products.
X has argued that it does not serve as a critical gateway between businesses and consumers, distancing itself from the obligations set by the DMA. While the investigation remains ongoing, the Commission has not provided further comment on its findings.
However, X faces more pressing issues under the EU’s newly implemented Digital Services Act (DSA), which requires large platforms to actively combat harmful or illegal content or face significant fines—up to 6% of their global turnover. X is under scrutiny as part of several ongoing investigations related to its compliance with the DSA.
Hawaii’s new cryptocurrency regulations are attracting major Web3 firms, including MetaMask and Transak, which are now establishing operations in the state. As of July 2024, crypto companies in Hawaii will no longer be required to obtain a money transmitter licence to operate, a significant departure from the strict regulations seen in most other US states. That regulatory shift is expected to transform Hawaii into a growing hub for the cryptocurrency industry, making it an appealing destination for businesses looking to expand within the United States.
The change comes after Hawaii’s four-year Digital Currency Innovation Lab initiative, which offered a regulated sandbox for crypto firms. With the end of this programme and the introduction of the new regulations, Hawaii is now poised to take on a larger role in the global crypto ecosystem. Companies like Transak view this as an opportunity to enhance their services without the challenges of third-party involvement, positioning Hawaii as a key player in the Web3 sector.
The relaxed regulatory environment is especially advantageous for smaller crypto businesses, which often face difficulties obtaining a money transmitter licence in the US. With Hawaii’s more flexible approach, the state is likely to attract even more crypto companies, cementing its position as a strategic market for innovation in the industry.
The Central Bank of the United Arab Emirates (CBUAE) has approved a new product offering custodial risk insurance for digital asset platforms, developed by Hong Kong-based OneDegree in partnership with Dubai Insurance. Available under the brand “OneInfinity,” this insurance aims to protect Web3 exchanges, asset managers, and custodians from the risk of losing customer funds, including through hacking, internal fraud, or damage to storage systems.
According to Robin Scott, general manager of OneDegree in the Middle East, the introduction of custodial risk insurance brings a layer of protection similar to deposit protection schemes in traditional banking. It allows crypto platforms to offer peace of mind to clients by ensuring their assets are safeguarded. Many global regulators, including those in the UAE, are making such insurance mandatory to prioritise consumer protection.
The CBUAE’s approval marks the first time UAE-based companies can obtain custodial risk insurance locally, which is expected to draw significant interest as more firms seek licences to operate in the region. OneDegree and Dubai Insurance have already started issuing policies to UAE clients and anticipate high demand for the product.
