Connect with us

Technology

As Google’s antitrust trial wraps, DOJ seeks sanctions over missing messages

Published

on

As Google’s antitrust trial wraps, DOJ seeks sanctions over missing messages

The fate of Google’s search business is now in the hands of Judge Amit Mehta, as closing arguments concluded in the landmark trial on Friday.

The Department of Justice and plaintiff states made their last arguments Thursday on Google’s alleged anticompetitive conduct in the general search market, and on Friday focused on its allegedly illegal conduct in search advertising. Google was also under fire (separately) for failing to retain chat messages that the DOJ believes could have been relevant to the case. 

The government is trying to show that Google locked up key distribution channels for the general search engine market, so that would-be rivals could not grow into significant threats. It says it did so through contracts with phone manufacturers and browser companies to be their exclusive default search engine. If the judge agrees that Google successfully foreclosed competition in that market, he can consider the government’s arguments about the search advertising market as evidence of anticompetitive conduct.

In his summary, DOJ attorney Kenneth Dintzer said that the last major tech monopoly decision, US v. Microsoft, “fits like a glove” on Google. Google’s lead litigator in the case, John Schmidtlein, disagreed. In Microsoft, he said, manufacturers were coerced into deals and customers were spoon-fed an inferior product they didn’t want. “Google has won with a superior product,” he said.

“The importance and significance of this case is not lost on me,” Mehta said as he concluded Friday’s court proceedings. “Not only for Google, but for the public.”

Advertisement

An adequate substitute for Google ads

If Google charges higher prices for advertising, are there suitable substitutes that advertisers would flee to? The answer to that question can say a lot about whether or not Google has the monopoly power that the DOJ alleges it has created through the contracts it has to be the default search engine on various browsers and devices. Google says there’s plenty of alternatives for advertisers; the government disagrees. 

Mehta seemed sympathetic to the government’s arguments, though he acknowledged that alternatives to Google are robust ad companies in their own right. Amazon, for instance, isn’t exactly an inferior substitute to Google for ads, said Mehta. Unlike wrapping a sandwich in newspaper instead of cellophane, Mehta said, “If you move your ad money from Google to Amazon, you’re not wrapping your ad in newspaper.”

But Mehta later differentiated ad platforms like Facebook and TikTok from Google. Users searching on Google come with a strong idea of what they’re looking for, pretty much spelling it out in the query. Social media platforms often have to infer that intent from indirect signals.

In 2017, Google ran an experiment over several weeks and found it could increase prices five to 15 percent while still growing revenue

Advertisement

In 2017, Google ran an experiment over several weeks and found it could increase prices five to 15 percent while still growing revenue. “Google is able to decide on what the margin that they are going to acquire is. And that’s why they’re running experiments to say, ‘well if we up it by 15 percent, how much are we going to lose in revenue?’” Mehta said to Schmidtlein. “That’s something that only a monopolist could do, right?” Schmidtlein disagreed, saying it’s fair to run pricing experiments to figure out if they’re charging the right price. 

Mehta pointed out that there was “no evidence that Google ever looks at a competitors’ pricing” for that purpose. Schmidtlein responded it wasn’t that simple. Because ads are sold through a complicated auction, not even Google has total insight into the pricing mechanism behind it. It simply isn’t the same as a Coca-Cola rep walking through a grocery store to see Pepsi’s prices.

Sabotaging ads on Bing

The plaintiff states — the attorneys general for 38 states led by Colorado and Nebraska  that brought the suit alongside the DOJ — are also arguing that Google intentionally dragged its feet when building certain features for SA360, its search engine marketing tool. SA360 helps advertisers manage ads through different platforms — not just Google, but competitors like Microsoft’s Bing. 

The states say that Google lagged behind in building a SA360 feature for Bing ads when it had already implemented it for Google search ads. 

Advertisement

“The evidence here is a little bit tricky for Google,” Mehta said, noting the significance of Google having said rather publicly at the start that it was “not going to play favorites” when it came to SA360. While Google could have chosen to exclude Microsoft from the tool at the outset, “that’s not the choice they made,” Mehta said. 

The tool was not delivered for nearly five years after Microsoft asked for it. “How can that not be at least inferred to be anticompetitive?” Mehta asked. 

Deleted chats

Hanging over the whole case is an issue about whether Google intentionally deleted or failed to retain documents that might have been used as evidence in this trial. 

Google had a policy of having “history off” on its chats by default, leaving it to employees to determine when to turn it on for relevant conversations. DOJ’s Dintzer called the alleged destruction of documents “unequivocal and honestly breathtaking.” He added that “there’s no question” executives “intentionally had conversations with history off.”

Advertisement

“Google’s retention policy leaves a lot to be desired,” said the judge, adding disapprovingly that it was “surprising to me that a company would leave it to their employees to decide when to preserve documents.”

“Google’s retention policy leaves a lot to be desired”

Soon after, Dintzer’s slide deck paused on a slide that simply read “This is Wrong,” as the DOJ attorney pointed out Google never apologized for the unretained documents nor promised not to do it again in the future. He said it’s imperative that the court impose sanctions that show the risk of destroying documents is not worthwhile. The DOJ is asking Mehta to make an adverse inference about Google for any element of the case where he doesn’t think plaintiffs have sufficient evidence. That would mean the judge would assume that any deleted chats would have been bad for Google and showed their anticompetitive intent behind their contracts with manufacturers and browsers. The DOJ also wants Mehta to take the destroyed chats as a signal of its anticompetitive intent.

Google attorney Colette Connor said the company’s lawyers had informed the state of Texas (one of the plaintiffs) early on about their retention policies. Dintzer said even that disclosure came months after the litigation hold and that the DOJ “clearly” would have acted had they known.

Mehta didn’t seem to buy Google’s defense. “It’s interesting to me that Google has been very deliberate — and perhaps after seeing what’s happened with Microsoft – very deliberate in advising employees in what not to say,” he said. In a training for employees, the company advised avoiding terms like “market share.” (Bloomberg Law has noted this is a common practice in large companies.)

Advertisement

It’s now up to Mehta to decide how those absent chats should be accounted for. He hasn’t provided a timeline for his decision, but in the meantime, Google and the DOJ will be preparing for their second antitrust face-off over advertising technology in the fall. 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Technology

Google’s NotebookLM can sum up your research in a TikTok-style clip

Published

on

Google’s NotebookLM can sum up your research in a TikTok-style clip

Google’s NotebookLM is adding a new way to catch up on your notes: TikTok-style AI videos. The new feature is rolling out to Google AI Ultra and Pro subscribers, allowing NotebookLM to generate 60-second vertical AI clips based on the sources you upload to the app.

The example shared by Google details Australia’s unsuccessful war on emus, pairing paper cutout-style AI art of emus with narration. It adds to some of the other ways NotebookLM lets you interact with your research, including by generating AI podcasts, cinematic videos, and visual explainers.

To generate a 60-second clip, head to NotebookLM on the web or app, select a notebook, and then choose “Video” from the Studio column on the right side of the screen. From there, select “Short,” choose the topic you’d like NotebookLM to focus on (or enter your own), and then hit the “Generate” button.

The feature is rolling out in English only for now, with support for free users coming “soon.”

Continue Reading

Technology

The trick to smoother streaming at home and on the road

Published

on

The trick to smoother streaming at home and on the road

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Ever settle in for movie night, hit play, and thirty seconds later, the picture dissolves into a blurry mess of pixels? You restart the app. You restart the router. You’re paying for a fast internet plan, so what gives?

Before you spend forty minutes on hold with your provider, there’s something you should know: the problem might not be your connection speed at all. It m

ight be your internet provider putting the brakes on certain types of traffic.

The good news is that one tool may help, especially when your provider is slowing down streaming traffic that it can recognize.

Advertisement

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

  • Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
  • For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
  • Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.

TRAVEL MISTAKE PUTS PHONE, LAPTOP AND STREAMING ACCOUNTS AT RISK

Buffering during streaming may not always be caused by slow internet speeds. ISP bandwidth throttling could be reducing video quality, and a VPN may help in some cases. (Photo by Marcus Brandt/picture alliance via Getty Images)

Why your streaming keeps buffering

Internet service providers handle enormous amounts of traffic. When their networks get congested, they look for ways to manage the load. One of the handiest tools in their bag is a technique called bandwidth throttling. It means deliberately slowing down certain types of traffic to ease the pressure on their infrastructure. Streaming video is one of the first things they may target because it eats up a lot of bandwidth fast.

Here’s the part that most people don’t realize: your ISP can often see what kind of traffic you’re sending and receiving. When they detect a steady stream of traffic flowing from a streaming platform, they may put a speed limit on that traffic specifically, even while your overall connection seems fine. You won’t always get a warning, but you will notice a dip in video quality.

That’s why you can load a webpage in a blink but still have to sit through buffer wheels before your show even gets going. The issue may not be your speed. It may be what your ISP does with it once they know how you’re using it.

Advertisement

Travelers can run into an additional wrinkle. Hotel networks and public connections are often shared across dozens or hundreds of people at once. When everyone is streaming, browsing and video calling at the same time, the network slows to a crawl and your video quality pays the price. What worked fine at home suddenly stutters and stalls on the road.

The fix most people don’t know about

A VPN, or virtual private network, is usually thought of as a privacy and security tool, but it may also help with some throttling problems. It runs quietly in the background while you stream.

When you connect to the internet through a VPN, your traffic gets encrypted before it leaves your device. Your ISP can still see that you’re using data, but it can no longer easily see what kind. Streaming traffic looks like encrypted data passing through, which means there’s no obvious streaming target to throttle. The result can be a more consistent connection, fewer interruptions and less of that infuriating mid-episode quality drop.

And there’s an extra benefit for travelers: Your traffic is encrypted on hotel, airport and café Wi-Fi. That can help protect what you’re doing online, though it won’t magically fix a network that’s overloaded. A good VPN can help keep your connection more stable across the unpredictable variety of networks you encounter while traveling, not to mention help protect you from public Wi-Fi hackers.

Just keep in mind that some streaming services may limit or block VPN connections, so you may need to switch servers or check the service’s rules.

Advertisement

NETFLIX CO-CEO CLARIFIES STREAMING GIANT’S LIVE SPORTS STRATEGY AMID NFL LINEUP EXPANSION, FEDERAL SCRUTINY

A VPN can encrypt your internet traffic, making it harder for internet providers to identify and selectively throttle streaming services. (Photo by Grichka BEYSSON-LEANDRI / Hans Lucas / AFP via Getty Images)

What to look for in a VPN for streaming

There’s no shortage of VPN options out there, but for streaming, a few things matter more than others.

Speed is king when it comes to video. A VPN that encrypts your traffic but slows your connection defeats the whole purpose. Look for a provider with a large network of fast servers and a proven track record with high-definition and 4K content.

Device support matters too. Your streaming life doesn’t live on just one screen. It’s also on your phone, your smart TV, your tablet and your laptop. A good VPN covers all of them under one subscription and will let you run it on multiple devices simultaneously.

Advertisement

Our top VPN pick checks all these boxes and is more than fast enough for high-quality streaming.

For the best VPN software, see my expert review of the best VPNs for browsing the web privately on your Windows, Mac, Android & iOS devices at Cyberguy.com

A few more tricks to keep in mind

Before blaming throttling, test your speed with the VPN on and off, restart your router, move closer to Wi-Fi, use a 5 GHz or 6 GHz network when available and try Ethernet for your main TV. If everything else is fast but streaming keeps dropping quality, throttling becomes a more likely suspect. Pair a VPN with these tips, and buffering becomes a rare event instead of a nightly battle.

1) Connect before you open the app

Turn on your VPN first, then launch your streaming service. It’ll save you the hassle of reconnecting in the middle of the episode.

2) Choose a nearby server

In general, the closer the server, the lower the lag. A server in your home city usually delivers the best balance of speed and stability.

Advertisement

3) Check your home router

If streaming still struggles with a VPN running, an outdated router might be your weakest link. A dual-band or Wi-Fi 6 model makes a noticeable difference on busy home networks. Looking to upgrade your home setup? Check out our guide to the Top 5 routers for best security in 2026 at Cyberguy.com

4) Download before you go

Most major streaming apps let you save content for offline playback. Load up a few episodes on your home connection before a long trip, and you might not need to stream at all for the first leg of your journey.

INSTANTLY UPGRADE YOUR STREAMING: AT HOME AND WHEN TRAVELING

Travelers using hotel or public Wi-Fi may benefit from a VPN’s added privacy, though it cannot overcome an overloaded network. (Photo by Alex Pantling/Getty Images)

Kurt’s key takeaways

Buffering isn’t something you have to accept, and your internet plan may not be the issue. Your provider could be managing your traffic when it recognizes what you’re watching. A reliable VPN can make it that much harder, whether you’re on your couch or in a hotel room across the country. Remember: the trick to smoother streaming isn’t always paying for faster speed. It’s making sure the speed you’re already paying for actually reaches your device.

Advertisement

Are you using a VPN for streaming, or have you found another workaround that does the job? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report

  • Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
  • For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
  • Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.

Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.

Continue Reading

Technology

After a great start, DC’s new cinematic universe is already slowing down

Published

on

After a great start, DC’s new cinematic universe is already slowing down

Though hopes were high for Supergirl, the movie has turned out to be a bit of a dud. Critics have been rather down on the project, and its lackluster box office performance has it on track to lose WBD somewhere between $100–120 million. Films flop all the time, and Supergirl not resonating with audiences probably wouldn’t be a huge deal if we knew that DC Studios had more exciting things coming down the pike. But Supergirl feels like it could be an early sign that Gunn’s grand plan for the DCU is falling apart before it even really gets off the ground.

Loosely based on Tom King and Bilquis Evely’s Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow comic miniseries, the new Supergirl film follows Superman’s cousin Kara (Milly Alcock) as she embarks on an interstellar bender that culminates in her dog being poisoned by crew of sex-trafficking pirates. Unlike Superman (David Corenswet), Supergirl doesn’t really have a problem with killing her enemies — especially when they’re trying to stop her from saving Krypto. But with an orphaned girl (Eve Ridley) tagging along for the adventure, Kara tries to set a good (read: no murdering) example.

Supergirl struggles to make its titular heroine feel distinct from Superman

Though Supergirl comes from director Craig Gillespie and writer Ana Nogueira, everything about this movie — from its focus on animals in distress to its needle drops — makes it feel a lot like some of Gunn’s previous work. Supergirl’s drunken brawls in alien bars and scenes of her schlepping around space in a junky starship look like they could have been ripped from any one of Marvel’s Guardians of the Galaxy features. You can hear Nogueira channeling Gunn’s spiky sense of humor as the movie introduces new faces like unhinged bounty hunter Lobo (a distracting Jason Momoa in comics-accurate garb). Momoa’s presence is a constant reminder of how the DCEU fell apart, but Lobo isn’t really what drags Supergirl down.

As refreshing as it was to see Superman gloss over Clark Kent’s oft-repeated tragic backstory, Supergirl spends much of its runtime rehashing the details of Krypton’s destruction. Flashbacks to Kara’s past are meant to help us understand the grief she’s been living with, and to see why her sense of morality is very different from her cousin’s. But rather than unpacking Kara’s emotions in any meaningful way, the movie makes light of her substance abuse while sending her on a by-the-numbers adventure that’s generally lacking when it comes to intrigue or visual spectacle.

Advertisement

One of Supergirl’s more glaring issues is the way it struggles to find organic ways to make its titular heroine feel distinct from Superman. Aside from her relative brutality and moody outlook, she’s just another indestructible alien who periodically needs to recharge her powers by basking in yellow sunlight. The movie tries to give itself some stakes by constantly putting Kara in situations where she’s left without her abilities. But by the second sequence in which Kara’s getting punched out by a bunch of dudes, you get the sense that DC Studios never really locked in on a plan to make this story pop.

That’s somewhat surprising given the way Gunn has previously insisted that DC Studios would “never put a half-assed script in production” simply because the project had already been announced. Half-assed is the perfect description of Supergirl’s entire vibe, and it being the studio’s second major feature doesn’t exactly bode well for the DCU’s future. Supergirl needed to demonstrate that Gunn had a solid plan to build a new universe on the backs of some of DC’s lower profile characters. Though we’ve already seen some of how that could work in HBO’s Peacemaker series, it was less clear whether the studio could pull it off on the big screen. The entire point of rebooting WBD’s superhero movies was to put DC Studios in a better position to compete with Marvel — which is on the verge of its own major reset. But whereas Marvel has a few reliable aces like the X-Men and a new Spider-Man movie up its sleeve, DC is essentially starting from scratch.

Some of Supergirl’s problems might not be so readily apparent if there had been more time before it and Superman’s theatrical debuts. The two movies coming out so close to one another emphasizes their characters’ general similarities, and makes it seem like DC might be a little too comfortable putting out iterative projects. This calls into question Gunn’s decision to prioritize a series about the Green Lanterns and a Clayface film before introducing new versions of more well-known heroes like Batman and Wonder Woman. WBD still plans to put out a sequel to Matt Reeves’ The Batman that won’t technically be part of the DCU, but the Gotham of it all may get audiences primed to see a new Bane / Deathstroke movie that the studio is reportedly prioritizing in the wake of Supergirl’s underperformance.

All of these B-tier projects and alternate realities give the nascent DCU a whiff of the same messiness that has plagued Sony’s universe of Spider-Man spinoffs since its inception. And when you factor in WBD’s impending merger with Paramount Skydance, it seems very possible that the DCU might not come together the way Gunn originally intended. Though it’s possible that next year’s Man of Tomorrow could steer things in a stronger direction, what feels more likely right now is DC putting out another Super-movie that feels a little too similar to what we’ve seen before. It wouldn’t be the first time that WB found itself on the ropes with a comics-related crisis, but it might be the last chance the studio has to get this stuff right.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending