Like._老虎社区_美港股上老虎

Qkumba78
2021-07-08

Like.

States Target Google Play Store Practices in Antitrust Suit

Three dozen states and the District of Columbia filed an antitrust lawsuit against AlphabetInc.’s Go

States Target Google Play Store Practices in Antitrust Suit

免责声明：上述内容仅代表发帖人个人观点，不构成本平台的任何投资建议。

推荐
最新

暂无评论

热议股票

关于我们·老虎社区守则·老虎社区账号管理规范·老虎社区服务协议·老虎社区隐私政策

公司名称：北京至简风宜信息技术有限公司

违法和不良信息投诉：010-5681-3562（工作时间9:30-18:30）

邮箱：service@laohu8.com

营业执照：91110105MA01A4U55R

ICP备：京ICP备18016422号

网安备：京公网安备11010502036490

关注我们

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"magic":2,"id":149271779,"tweetId":"149271779","gmtCreate":1625733058791,"gmtModify":1631890354447,"author":{"id":3586247812995498,"idStr":"3586247812995498","authorId":3586247812995498,"authorIdStr":"3586247812995498","name":"Qkumba78","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f9e01f6ccf04373db649d7bb184d086d","vip":1,"userType":1,"introduction":"","boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[],"fanSize":2,"starInvestorFlag":false},"themes":[],"images":[],"coverImages":[],"extraTitle":"","html":"<html><head></head><body><p>Like.&nbsp;</p></body></html>","htmlText":"<html><head></head><body><p>Like.&nbsp;</p></body></html>","text":"Like.","highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/149271779","repostId":1150920713,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1150920713","pubTimestamp":1625729674,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1150920713?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-08 15:34","market":"us","language":"en","title":"States Target Google Play Store Practices in Antitrust Suit","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1150920713","media":"WSJ","summary":"Three dozen states and the District of Columbia filed an antitrust lawsuit against AlphabetInc.’s Go","content":"<p>Three dozen states and the District of Columbia filed an antitrust lawsuit against&nbsp;AlphabetInc.’s&nbsp;Google on Wednesday, alleging that the company operates an illegal monopoly with its Google Play app store.</p>\n<p>The bipartisan antitrust suit adds to the company’s mounting legal challenges. Led by the state of Utah and filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, it alleges that the company has monopolized the distribution of apps on mobile devices that run the Google-owned Android operating system, blocking competition through contracts, technical barriers and other means.</p>\n<p>In a blog post, Google said it provides an open operating system in which customers are free to download apps directly from developers’ websites.</p>\n<p>“It’s strange that a group of state attorneys general chose to file a lawsuit attacking a system that provides more openness and choice than others,” wrote Wilson White, senior director of public policy.</p>\n<p>Over the past year, Google has faced lawsuits from state and federal officials over its dominance of search advertising and its ad tech business.</p>\n<p>Google has built a multibillion-dollar digital empire over the past decade by becoming the primary gatekeeper for apps that are downloaded to smartphones using its Android operating system. It requires apps distributed through its Play Store to use a Google payment system and collects a 15% to 30% service fee on sales.</p>\n<p>The states’ lawsuit challenges Google’s description of Android as an open operating system.</p>\n<p>It targets the in-app payment requirement, saying it has allowed Google to monopolize in-app payments on Android phones and charge excessive commissions.</p>\n<p>Practices such as those harm consumers by raising the prices of apps and weakening competition between developers that could lead to more secure apps with better features, the suit alleges.</p>\n<p>The states also accuse Google of trying to “buy off”Samsung ElectronicsCo., a manufacturer of smartphones.</p>\n<p>Samsung’s Galaxy app store competes with Google Play, and Google offered to compensate Samsung if the latter company would “give up its direct commercial relationships in app distribution with consumers and developers,” the suit alleges. Samsung didn’t respond to a request for comment.</p>\n<p>The case from the states against Google’s app store follows an antitrust case filed by Epic Games Inc., which alleged that Google acted in an anticompetitive way in operating the store and eventually pulling the company’s “Fortnite” game from its virtual shelves. Epic has a similar lawsuit againstAppleInc.</p>\n<p>In a tweet, Epic Chief Executive Tim Sweeney said Google blocks competition on Android phones. “It’s tragic that the ‘Don’t Be Evil’ company let it come to this,” he wrote.</p>\n<p>Thestates began their investigationinto Google about two years ago. Over the course of the following year, attorneys general focused on separate areas of Google’s business with an eye on bringing a single suit against the search company, according to people familiar with the matter.</p>\n<p>Instead of one case, the states split up across several issues. Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes deemed the Play Store anticompetitive last year and planned to bring a suit, but decided to wait until 2021 after Colorado and Texas filed separate suits against Google’s search and ad tech businesses, according to these people.</p>\n<p>The Justice Department isscrutinizing the business practicesof Apple. The state investigation of Google began sooner, according to people familiar with the matter, and was further along than the Apple probe.</p>\n<p>The suit filed Wednesday came days after Google updated its Play Store policy, requiring developers to use a proprietary application format for apps distributed through its store. The company said the change reduces app size to speed downloads for users. The policy update triggered criticism from developers who alleged that it would lock apps into the Play Store and discourage competing distributors.</p>\n<p>The updated policy influenced the timing of the Utah filing, the people familiar with the matter said.</p>\n<p>The case could be difficult for states to win. Unlike Apple, which exclusively distributes apps through its store, Android device owners can access apps through other app marketplaces. Proponents of the case argue that the market share of those competitors is dwarfed by Google.</p>\n<p>The Utah-led lawsuit says that the Play store has a 90% share of app distribution on Android phones and that no competitor has more than a 5% share. It says that Google’s rules restrict direct downloads of apps and only allows so-called sideloading to “maintain its image of ‘openness.’”</p>\n<p>Google earlier this year reduced its commission on Play store sales,cutting its fees to 15% from 30%on the first $1 million developers earn. Roughly $38.6 billion was spent in the Play store last year, while the App Store generated $72.3 billion, according to Sensor Tower, a firm that tracks the app industry.</p>\n<p>The timing of a trial over the Play store will be determined in the months ahead. The Justice Department’s antitrust suit against Google is scheduled for trial in 2023, targeting its dominant search-engine business. Two other ongoing state antitrust lawsuits are set to begin at about the same time.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>States Target Google Play Store Practices in Antitrust Suit</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nStates Target Google Play Store Practices in Antitrust Suit\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-08 15:34 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-target-google-play-store-in-antitrust-suit-11625694096?mod=hp_lead_pos1><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Three dozen states and the District of Columbia filed an antitrust lawsuit against AlphabetInc.’s Google on Wednesday, alleging that the company operates an illegal monopoly with its Google Play app ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-target-google-play-store-in-antitrust-suit-11625694096?mod=hp_lead_pos1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GOOG":"谷歌"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-target-google-play-store-in-antitrust-suit-11625694096?mod=hp_lead_pos1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1150920713","content_text":"Three dozen states and the District of Columbia filed an antitrust lawsuit against AlphabetInc.’s Google on Wednesday, alleging that the company operates an illegal monopoly with its Google Play app store.\nThe bipartisan antitrust suit adds to the company’s mounting legal challenges. Led by the state of Utah and filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, it alleges that the company has monopolized the distribution of apps on mobile devices that run the Google-owned Android operating system, blocking competition through contracts, technical barriers and other means.\nIn a blog post, Google said it provides an open operating system in which customers are free to download apps directly from developers’ websites.\n“It’s strange that a group of state attorneys general chose to file a lawsuit attacking a system that provides more openness and choice than others,” wrote Wilson White, senior director of public policy.\nOver the past year, Google has faced lawsuits from state and federal officials over its dominance of search advertising and its ad tech business.\nGoogle has built a multibillion-dollar digital empire over the past decade by becoming the primary gatekeeper for apps that are downloaded to smartphones using its Android operating system. It requires apps distributed through its Play Store to use a Google payment system and collects a 15% to 30% service fee on sales.\nThe states’ lawsuit challenges Google’s description of Android as an open operating system.\nIt targets the in-app payment requirement, saying it has allowed Google to monopolize in-app payments on Android phones and charge excessive commissions.\nPractices such as those harm consumers by raising the prices of apps and weakening competition between developers that could lead to more secure apps with better features, the suit alleges.\nThe states also accuse Google of trying to “buy off”Samsung ElectronicsCo., a manufacturer of smartphones.\nSamsung’s Galaxy app store competes with Google Play, and Google offered to compensate Samsung if the latter company would “give up its direct commercial relationships in app distribution with consumers and developers,” the suit alleges. Samsung didn’t respond to a request for comment.\nThe case from the states against Google’s app store follows an antitrust case filed by Epic Games Inc., which alleged that Google acted in an anticompetitive way in operating the store and eventually pulling the company’s “Fortnite” game from its virtual shelves. Epic has a similar lawsuit againstAppleInc.\nIn a tweet, Epic Chief Executive Tim Sweeney said Google blocks competition on Android phones. “It’s tragic that the ‘Don’t Be Evil’ company let it come to this,” he wrote.\nThestates began their investigationinto Google about two years ago. Over the course of the following year, attorneys general focused on separate areas of Google’s business with an eye on bringing a single suit against the search company, according to people familiar with the matter.\nInstead of one case, the states split up across several issues. Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes deemed the Play Store anticompetitive last year and planned to bring a suit, but decided to wait until 2021 after Colorado and Texas filed separate suits against Google’s search and ad tech businesses, according to these people.\nThe Justice Department isscrutinizing the business practicesof Apple. The state investigation of Google began sooner, according to people familiar with the matter, and was further along than the Apple probe.\nThe suit filed Wednesday came days after Google updated its Play Store policy, requiring developers to use a proprietary application format for apps distributed through its store. The company said the change reduces app size to speed downloads for users. The policy update triggered criticism from developers who alleged that it would lock apps into the Play Store and discourage competing distributors.\nThe updated policy influenced the timing of the Utah filing, the people familiar with the matter said.\nThe case could be difficult for states to win. Unlike Apple, which exclusively distributes apps through its store, Android device owners can access apps through other app marketplaces. Proponents of the case argue that the market share of those competitors is dwarfed by Google.\nThe Utah-led lawsuit says that the Play store has a 90% share of app distribution on Android phones and that no competitor has more than a 5% share. It says that Google’s rules restrict direct downloads of apps and only allows so-called sideloading to “maintain its image of ‘openness.’”\nGoogle earlier this year reduced its commission on Play store sales,cutting its fees to 15% from 30%on the first $1 million developers earn. Roughly $38.6 billion was spent in the Play store last year, while the App Store generated $72.3 billion, according to Sensor Tower, a firm that tracks the app industry.\nThe timing of a trial over the Play store will be determined in the months ahead. The Justice Department’s antitrust suit against Google is scheduled for trial in 2023, targeting its dominant search-engine business. Two other ongoing state antitrust lawsuits are set to begin at about the same time.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":203,"commentLimit":10,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"symbols":[],"verified":2,"subType":0,"readableState":1,"langContent":"EN","currentLanguage":"EN","warmUpFlag":false,"orderFlag":false,"shareable":true,"causeOfNotShareable":"","featuresForAnalytics":[],"commentAndTweetFlag":false,"andRepostAutoSelectedFlag":false,"upFlag":false,"length":5,"xxTargetLangEnum":"ORIG"},"commentList":[],"hasMoreComment":false,"orderType":2}