Google is facing more antitrust pressure in the EU over its advertising tech. Reutersreports the European Publishers Council (EPC) has filed an EU complaint against Google alleging the company has an illegal "stranglehold" on ad tech and the press. The Internet giant's ad suite is claimed to be "rife with conflicts of interests" as it not only represents the buyer, seller and auction house, but supposedly exploits that control to profit at the expense of its customers.

Council Chairman Christian Van Thillo saw the complaint as prompting the EU to take action where it was otherwise reluctant. The move should make Google "actually change" its behavior after years of "minor commitments" that don't provide any substantial impact, Van Thillo said. The EPC pointed to antitrust cases in multiple countries to support its case, including a multi-state US lawsuit.

The EU began its newest probe into Google's ad business in June 2021. It shares the EPC's general concerns about potential abuse. It didn't set a deadline for the investigation, however, and has already fined Google three times over its ad practices. Antitrust hunts like these can take years to wind down, and the complaint theoretically accelerates the process.

In a statement, Google argued companies enjoyed its ad tech but didn't address the unfair competition issues. Publishers keep the "majority of revenue," which climbs to "billions" of US dollars, a representative said.

There's no certainty the EPC complaint will prompt the EU to demand significant changes to Google's ad policies. It might ramp up the pressure on Google to act, however, even if it's just to minimize any potential penalties.

A California civil rights agency has filed a lawsuit against Tesla for alleged racial discrimination and harassment at its Fremont factory, according to The Wall Street Journal. "After receiving hundreds of complaints from workers, DFEH found evidence that Tesla’s Fremont factory is a racially segregated workplace," said California Department of Fair Employment and Housing director Kevin Kish in a statement. 

The DFEH said Black employees were frequently exposed to racial slurs and graffiti, with one worker saying they heard such slurs 50 to 100 times per day. "Black workers are subjected to racial slurs and discriminated against in job assignments, discipline, pay, and promotion creating a hostile work environment," said Kish.

Tesla called the lawsuit "unfair and unproductive" in a blog released prior to the complaint being made public. "Tesla strongly opposes all forms of discrimination and harassment and has a dedicated Employee Relations team that responds to and investigates all complaints," the company wrote. "Tesla is also the last remaining automobile manufacturer in California. The Fremont factory has a majority-minority workforce and provides the best paying jobs in the automotive industry to over 30,000 Californians." It also said that over 50 previous DFEH investigations over the last five years were closed without any findings of misconduct.

Last October, Tesla was ordered to pay $137 million in damages to a former Black worker who accused the company of turning a blind eye to discrimination and racial abuse in 2015 and 2016. Tesla disagreed with the verdict, with a spokesperson saying the company was "not perfect" at that time but has "come a long way" since then. Tesla recently moved its corporate headquarters to Texas from California, but has also said it would expand its manufacturing activities by 50 percent in California. 

Tesla has previously tussled with the state of California over COVID-19 related plant closures, and isn't the only high-profile company in the DFEH's crosshairs. The agency recently sued Activision Blizzard for alleged harassment and discrimination against female employees. 

With the US labor market getting tighter and employees changing jobs or quitting in droves, Amazon has made a big move to become more competitive. The company has boosted its maximum base pay from $160,000 to $350,000, in response to what it calls a "particularly competitive labor market," The Washington Post has reported.

In a recent Amazon Web Services (AWS) blog, the company said that it pays around 50-65 percent of "what 'the market' will pay you." By contrast, it noted that Microsoft paid 75 percent, Google 95 percent and Netflix "top of market." Until now, anything more than $160,000 at Amazon was instead compensated by stock or cash signing bonuses.

This past year has seen a particularly competitive labor market and in doing a thorough analysis of various options, weighing the economics of our business and the need to remain competitive for attracting and retaining top talent, we decided to make meaningfully bigger increases to our compensation levels than we do in a typical year.

According to Amazon's own information, the company's maximum base pay is now also at the top market level, or more. It's also increasing overall compensation for most jobs around the world, with increases "much more considerable than we've done in the past," it wrote. At the same time, it's keeping the alternate compensation options, like stock options and signing bonuses, according to GeekWire. 

The change comes as Amazon's stock options become perhaps less interesting, considering that its share prices are down 15 percent from their peak in July 2021. Potential employees, especially top candidates who have their pick of tech companies, may have noticed that as well. 

The co-producer of The Matrix Resurrections, in a new lawsuit, is blaming the film’s lackluster box office numbers on a same-day streaming release. According to The Wall Street Journal, Village Roadshow Entertainment Group filed a lawsuit today against Warner Bros., the owner of streaming platform HBO Max. The suit alleges that both the same-day release of The Matrix Resurrections and pushing up the film’s release date was a breach of contract. The suit also claims that moving the movie’s release date from 2022 to 2021 was a bid by Warner Bros. to drive up subscriptions to HBO Max.

Last year’s decision by Warner Bros. to release an entire slate of new films concurrently on HBO Max and in theaters raised many eyebrows. In addition to The Matrix, the 16 other films in Warner Bros’ simultaneous release strategy included Dune, Godzilla vs. Kong, Mortal Kombat, King Arthur, and others. The experiment likely doomed their box office fates, as The Wrapnoted. Only two of the 17 films made more than $100 million in domestic box office sales.

The Matrix Resurrections, which was released in December, normally a peak time for box office earnings, has grossed over $37.2 million in domestic box office sales, according to BoxOfficeMojo. This is a noticeable decline compared to a number of other blockbusters with theater-only releases from last winter, such as Spider-Man:No Way Home, which has made more than $748 million in the domestic box office and the James Bond film No Time To Die, which has earned more than $160 million in the domestic box office.

Village Roadshow also alleges that Warner Bros. is attempting to keep the company out of future movie and TV deals. “WB has also been devising various schemes to deprive Village Roadshow of its continuing rights to co-own and co-invest in the derivative works from the films it co-owns,” the suit alleged.

The Matrix lawsuit is the latest conflict between Hollywood studios and the media companies that own the streaming platforms. Black Widow actress Scarlett Johansson last year sued Disney over the film’s simultaneous release strategy, which she claimed harmed its box office prospects and her own earnings. Johansson subsequently received an undisclosed settlement from Disney last fall.

Sweden-based price comparison service PriceRunner has announced that it's suing Google for €2.1 billion ($2.4 billion) after a European court ruled that Google breached EU antitrust laws. Last November, the European Union's General Court upheld a decision to fine Google a record €2.42 billion (US$2.8 billion) for favoring its own comparison shopping services over rivals. 

"We are ... seeking compensation for the damage Google has caused us during many years, but are also seeing this lawsuit as a fight for consumers who have suffered tremendously from Google’s infringement of the competition law for the past fourteen years and still today," said PriceRunner CEO Mikael Lindahl. 

PriceRunner claimed that Google has a "monopoly-like position" in Europe adding that it believes it has still not complied with the EU Commission's decision and is "abusing it's dominant position." As such, it claimed that traffic and profits are diverted from itself and other shopping services, and that its offers are higher than other services, harming consumers. "Since the violation is still ongoing the amount of damages increases every day, we expect the final damages amount of the lawsuit to be significantly higher," it wrote.

Google lost its first appeal against the EU fine, but it launched another one last month, saying "we feel there are areas that require legal clarification from the European Court of Justice." Engadget has reached out to Google for comment on the PriceRunner lawsuit. 

News Corp says it was the target of a cyberattack that impacted The Wall Street Journal, New York Post, Dow Jones, its UK news operations and other publications and business units. The company says hackers accessed the emails and documents of some employees, including journalists. A cybersecurity consultant News Corp brought in believes that China was connected to the intrusion, and that the aim of the attack may have been to gather intelligence for the country's benefit.

The attack was discovered on January 20th and News Corp disclosed it in a securities filing on Friday. It also informed law enforcement. According to The Journal, the company told staff the threat appears to have been contained and that it's offering support to affected employees. It doesn't appear that systems containing financial and customer data (including details on subscribers) were affected.

It's not the first time The Journal has been the target of a cyberattack. The publication said Chinese hackers aiming to keep tabs on coverage of the country accessed its network in 2013 to snoop on reporters.

This week, FBI director Christopher Wray said China is behind a “massive, sophisticated hacking program that is bigger than those of every other major nation combined.” Wray noted the agency has more than 2,000 investigations in progress connected to thefts of US tech or information that were allegedly orchestrated by the Chinese government. On average, the FBI opens two such probes every day.

Google is once again facing claims it copied others' code in Android. Purdue University has sued Google over allegations the company is knowingly violating a patent for detecting power management bugs in code. The internet giant purportedly saw an article about Professor Y. Charlie Hu's research on the subject in 2012 and incorporated related infringing code into Android Lint, an error-catching tool in what would become the Android Studio development kit.

The USPTO granted the patent in August 2019. Purdue said it notified Google of the claimed violation in August 2021, but that Google had continued to incorporate the disputed code in Android Studio as recently as this month. The school is asking for unspecified "past and future" damages from Google.

In a statement, Google told Engadget it was still examining the lawsuit, but that it would "vigorously defend" itself and "independently develop[s]" products. We've asked Purdue for comment, but the university already told Reuters it believed Google violated more patents and would add them to the lawsuit if the company didn't negotiate licenses.

School technology patent lawsuits aren't new. Apple, for instance, was asked more than once to pay the University of Wisconsin over claimed infringements. This case may be more serious than some, however. Android Studio is a staple of Android app development — if Purdue can prove a violation in the first place, it could argue that a significant chunk of Android's app ecosystem is built around copied technology.

Epic Games has some important allies in its bid to overturn a court ruling that cleared Apple of violating antitrust laws. CNET and FOSS Patents report Microsoft, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the attorneys general of 35 states have filed briefs supporting Epic's case with the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The states argued the district court mistakenly claimed the first section of the Sherman Act (a cornerstone of US antitrust law) didn't apply to unilateral contracts like the terms Apple set for developers. The court also didn't properly weigh the damage of Apple's claimed anti-competitive behavior versus the benefits, according to the brief.

Microsoft, meanwhile, noted that it still had reason to be concerned about Apple's "extraordinary gatekeeper power" despite its size, citing its own interest in maintaining competition and innovation. This included allegedly anti-competitive behavior beyond the rules affecting Epic. Apple's effective ban on cloud gaming services in the App Store is believed to hurt Xbox Game Pass Ultimate, as an example. Microsoft also disputed the district court's view that Apple's in-app payment requirement wasn't an anti-competitive effort to tie products together.

The EFF, meanwhile, echoed the states' concerns about weighing harmful effects while offering parallels to Microsoft's interpretation of tying. The foundation also said the district court made errors when it presumed customers were fully aware of Apple's policies when they joined the company's platform.

Apple remained confident in its chances. In a statement to CNET, the company said it was "optimistic" the district court's ruling would be upheld and maintained its view that it was providing a "safe and trusted" App Store offering a "great opportunity" for creators. Epic has declined to comment.

Briefs like these won't guarantee success for Epic — the appeals court isn't obliged to consider them. This is a strong showing of support, however, and it won't be surprising if Microsoft, EFF and the states influence the decision. If Epic wins its appeal and doesn't face further challenges, Apple may have to further reform the App Store.

A group of Democratic lawmakers led by Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachuttes has asked six crypto mining companies, including Riot Blockchain, to answer questions about the impact of their operations on the environment and cost of electricity in the US. In separate letters to the chief executives of each firm, the group asks the companies to detail how much electricity they consume, their scaling plans and any agreements they have in place with local utility companies. They have until February 10th to reply.

Lawmakers say they’re concerned about what a dramatic increase in domestic cryptocurrency mining has meant for the environment and consumers. Specifically, they cite a 2021 study from the University of California, Berkeley that estimated crypto mining in upstate New York raised annual electricity bills by approximately $165 million for small businesses and $79 million for consumers, “with little or no local economic benefit.” They also point to the fact that energy consumption related to Bitcoin mining tripled between 2019 and 2021.

“The extraordinarily high energy usage and carbon emissions associated with Bitcoin mining could undermine our hard work to tackle the climate crisis – not to mention the harmful impacts crypto mining has on local environments and electricity prices,” Senator Warren said. “We need more information on the operations of these crypto mining companies to understand the full scope of the consequences for our environment and local communities.”

The group stops short of suggesting regulatory action could be on the horizon for the industry, but clearly the effect of cryptocurrency on other parts of the economy is something lawmakers are thinking about. On January 20th, the House Energy and Commerce Committee held a hearing titled “Cleaning up Cryptocurrency: The Energy Impacts of Blockchains.” What’s more, US lawmakers have taken a more board interest in cryptocurrencies in recent months. That was on display in December when the Senate held a hearing on Stablecoins.

Samsung's consolidated revenue for the fourth quarter of 2021 reached 76.57 trillion Korean won (US$63.7 billion), the tech giant has revealed in its latest earnings report. That's a quarterly record high for the company, which says that its revenue growth for the period was driven mainly by the expanded sales of its smartphones, TVs and home appliances. 

Its operating profit of KRW 13.87 trillion (US$11.5 billion) in the quarter ending December 31st, 2021 was lower than the previous quarter's, however, due to the bonuses that it doled out to employees for the season. The company has also reported a new historic revenue high of KRW 279.6 trillion (U$232.5 billion) for all of 2021, along with KRW 51.63 trillion (US$42.9 billion) in operating profits. 

Samsung's memory business, which is typically its biggest moneymaker, has experienced a decline in revenue from the previous quarter due to the global supply chain crisis and a slight drop in prices. Further, while demand for memory products remained strong, the company says it didn't push for sales as aggressively as it usually does after considering its inventory levels and the market outlook. The memory division posted a consolidated revenue of KRW 26.01 trillion (US$21.6 billion) and an operating profit of KRW 8.84 trillion (US$7.35 billion) for the fourth quarter of 2021. In the third quarter, it posted KRW 26.41 trillion (US$21.96 billion) in consolidated revenue and KRW 10.06 trillion (US$8.36 billion) in operating profit. 

Samsung's combined mobile and consumer electronics business, now called Mobile eXperience or MX, has posted KRW 28.95 trillion (US$24 billion) in consolidated revenue and KRW 2.66 trillion (US$2.2 billion) in operating profit. The slight increase in revenue was mainly due to the strong sales of its premium smartphones, namely its foldables and its Galaxy S series devices, as well as its PCs, tablets and wearables during the holiday season. Like in the previous quarter, though, the division's profitability was impacted by Samsung's marketing efforts for its foldables and for the launch of its upcoming models this year. 

Meanwhile, the company's mobile panel business saw an increase in earnings due to solid demand for new smartphones. Losses became larger for Samsung's large panel business, though, due to a decline in pricing for LCDs and the initial costs related to its Quantum Dot displays. Samsung also saw strong sales for its premium and lifestyle TVs, but its visual display business recorded a lower operating profit quarter-on-quarter because of rising material and logistics costs.

For 2022, Samsung expects growth in its memory business from higher server demand and in its display panel business from new smartphone releases. However, the company made it clear in its report that it also expects COVID-related supply issues and other problems to persist and affect its operations. Despite those constraints, it believes its MX business will still deliver revenue and profit growth led by its new flagships and by higher sales of its mass market 5G smartphones. Samsung has an Unpacked event scheduled on February 9th, where it will unveil the next S-series flagship to succeed the Galaxy S21 lineup.