Tech
Judge Stops Short of Forcing Google to Sell Chrome in Antitrust Case
A U.S. federal judge has ruled that Google will not be required to sell its Chrome browser, despite finding the company guilty of illegally maintaining a monopoly in online search. The decision, delivered Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in a 226-page order, imposes restrictions on some of Google’s practices but rejects the government’s bid for a broader breakup of the tech giant.
The ruling comes more than a year after Judge Mehta determined Google’s search business violated antitrust laws. While the decision curbs certain tactics that gave the company an edge, it stops short of banning lucrative default search contracts worth more than $26 billion annually. These deals, often with Apple and other device makers, make Google the default search engine on smartphones and computers.
Although Mehta acknowledged the agreements helped cement Google’s dominance, he concluded that outlawing them could do more harm than good, potentially destabilizing the industry. The judge also rejected the Justice Department’s push to force a divestiture of Chrome, calling it an “incredibly messy and highly risky” step unsupported by evidence that the browser was essential to Google’s monopoly.
Instead, Mehta ordered Google to open parts of its search database to rivals, including Bing and DuckDuckGo, granting them access to some of the data built up from trillions of user queries. Google had strongly opposed the move, warning it raised privacy and security concerns, but the court argued it was a fairer way to stimulate competition.
The Justice Department hailed the ruling as a “major win for the American people,” though officials signaled they may still push for stronger remedies. Advocacy groups, however, criticized the outcome as too lenient. “You don’t find someone guilty of robbing a bank and then sentence him to writing a thank you note for the loot,” said Nidhi Hegde, executive director of the American Economic Liberties Project.
Google, meanwhile, portrayed the ruling as validation of its stance that competition in search is robust, especially with artificial intelligence reshaping the industry. “The decision recognises how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, the company’s vice president of regulatory affairs.
The ruling was welcomed by Apple, which earns more than $20 billion annually from Google through search placement deals. Apple had warned earlier this year that losing such contracts would hurt its own research efforts. Investors also appeared reassured: Alphabet shares surged more than 7 percent in after-hours trading, while Apple stock climbed 3 percent.
Google still faces mounting legal challenges. Later this month, the Justice Department is set to argue another antitrust case targeting the company’s digital advertising operations, potentially posing an even greater threat to its business model.
Tech
Experts Question Impact of Australia’s New Social Media Ban for Children Under 16
Australia has introduced sweeping restrictions that prevent children under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts on major social media platforms, but experts warn the measures may not significantly change young people’s online behaviour. The restrictions, which took effect on December 10, apply to platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Twitch, Reddit and X.
Under the new rules, children cannot open accounts, yet they can still access most platforms without logging in—raising questions about how effective the regulations will be in shaping online habits. The eSafety Commissioner says the reforms are intended to shield children from online pressures, addictive design features and content that may harm their health and wellbeing.
Social media companies are required to block underage users through age-assurance tools that rely on facial-age estimation, ID uploads or parental consent. Ahead of the rollout, authorities tested 60 verification systems across 28,500 facial recognition assessments. The results showed that while many tools could distinguish children from adults, accuracy declined among users aged 16 and 17, girls and non-Caucasian users, where estimates could be off by two years or more. Experts say the limitations mean many teenagers may still find ways around the rules.
“How do they know who is 14 or 15 when the kids have all signed up as being 75?” asked Sonia Livingstone, a social psychology professor at the London School of Economics. She warned that misclassifications will be common as platforms attempt to enforce the regulations.
Meta acknowledged the challenge, saying complete accuracy is unlikely without requiring every user to present government ID—something the company argues would raise privacy and security concerns. Users over 16 who lose access by mistake are allowed to appeal.
Several platforms have criticised the ban, arguing that it removes teenagers from safer, controlled environments. Meta and Google representatives told Australian lawmakers that logged-in teenage accounts already come with protections that limit contact from unknown users, filter sensitive subjects and disable personalised advertising. Experts say these protections are not always effective, citing studies where new YouTube and TikTok accounts quickly received misogynistic or self-harm-related content.
Analysts expect many teenagers to shift to smaller or lesser-regulated platforms. Apps such as Lemon8, Coverstar and Tango have surged into Australia’s top downloads since the start of December. Messaging apps like WhatsApp, Telegram and Signal—exempt from the ban—have also seen a spike in downloads. Livingstone said teenagers will simply “find alternative spaces,” noting that previous bans in other countries pushed young users to new platforms within days.
Researchers caution that gaming platforms such as Discord and Roblox, also outside the scope of the ban, may become new gathering points for young Australians. Studies will be conducted to assess the long-term impact on mental health and whether the restrictions support or complicate parents’ efforts to regulate screen time.
Experts say it may take several years to determine whether the ban delivers meaningful improvements to children’s wellbeing.
Tech
OECD Warns of Sharp Rise in Cyberbullying Across Europe
Tech
Turkic States Seek Joint Strategy Against Online Disinformation as Global Platforms Outpace National Laws
-
Entertainment1 year agoMeta Acquires Tilda Swinton VR Doc ‘Impulse: Playing With Reality’
-
Business2 years agoSaudi Arabia’s Model for Sustainable Aviation Practices
-
Business2 years agoRecent Developments in Small Business Taxes
-
Home Improvement1 year agoEffective Drain Cleaning: A Key to a Healthy Plumbing System
-
Politics2 years agoWho was Ebrahim Raisi and his status in Iranian Politics?
-
Business1 year agoCarrectly: Revolutionizing Car Care in Chicago
-
Sports1 year agoKeely Hodgkinson Wins Britain’s First Athletics Gold at Paris Olympics in 800m
-
Business1 year agoSaudi Arabia: Foreign Direct Investment Rises by 5.6% in Q1
