- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Oscar Gonzalez2024-11-21T20:19:00
Three months after a U.S. district judge declared Google to be running a monopoly, the Department of Justice (DOJ) recommended the tech giant be forced to sell off its popular Chrome browser as part of an effort to resolve antitrust concerns and reshape the power of tech’s biggest companies.
In a 23-page filing Wednesday, the DOJ told District Court Judge Amit Mehta that forcing Google to separate itself from Chrome would be a necessary way to ensure Google’s monopoly over internet ads would come to an end.
The move wouldn’t just hit Chrome, however. The DOJ also suggested Google cleave its Android mobile software business in five years if the search market isn’t more competitive by that time. The DOJ also recommended Google be forced to share user and advertising data with its rivals, and remove any preferential treatment for its other businesses like YouTube in search results.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec. Select an option and click continue.
Annual Membership $499 Value offer
Full price one year membership with auto-renewal.
Membership $599
One-year only, no auto-renewal.
Lina Khan’s elevation to chair of the FTC on the same day her nomination was confirmed by the Senate signals the Biden administration’s intention to aggressively address antitrust issues.
With a changing of the guard, the Federal Trade Commission is undergoing some major restructuring on the antitrust front. All told, it’s not just Big Tech and pharmaceutical companies that should be on alert.
The FTC will require the top five U.S. technology firms—Alphabet Inc. (Google), Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft—to provide information on acquisitions not previously reported to the agency dating back 10 years.
A subsidiary of McKinsey & Co. will pay nearly $123 million to the Department of Justice to settle allegations that it bribed officials in South Africa to win consulting contracts.
A defamation lawsuit filed by a whistleblower against USAA, which a Florida judge recently dismissed on a technicality, revealed in public court records an estimated 400,000 violations of the Military Lending Act by USAA Federal Savings Bank (USAA Bank), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of USAA.
German petrochemical parts supplier Aiotec agreed to pay $14.5 million to settle allegations that it engaged in a four-year conspiracy to dismantle and ship a plastics manufacturing plant owned by a U.S. company to Iran, in violation of U.S. sanctions.
