Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. Legacy Archives

FTC Looking into Google-Apple Ties

Add as a preferred source on Google
FTC Looking into Google-Apple Ties
Image used with permission by copyright holder

It’s no secret that Apple and Google have been on fairly friendly terms over the last few years: a few examples include the iPhone tying in with services like YouTube and Google Maps as soon as it became available, and Google’s Chrome browser being based on WebKit, the same KHTML-derived codebase that Apple uses for its own Safari Web browser.

That overlap extends the the companies’ boards of directors too, where both Google and Apple share two people: Eric Schmidt, currently Google CEO, and Arthur Levinson, former Genentech CEO. However, the Clayton Antitrust Act (which dates back to 1914) prohibits someone from serving on the boards of two companies if their presence would decrease competition between those companies. Although Google and Apple are pals on some levels, they are also competitors: for instance, both companies offer a range of mobile communications services, and Google’s Android mobile platform is increasingly looking to challenge Apple’s iPhone in the smartphone marketplace.

Recommended Videos

To that end, the a href=”http://www.ftc.gov”>Federal Trade Commission has launched a formal inquiry into whether the ties between the companies’s boards violate antitrust laws. Although the provision of th Clayton Act that deals with overlaps in company boards is rarely enforced, the New York Times reports that the FTC has notified both companies that it is looking into the matter. In the past, when potential problems have arisen, an individual involved has usually choses to resign from the board of one of the companies, eliminating the potential conflict of interest.

Geoff Duncan
Former Contributor
Geoff Duncan writes, programs, edits, plays music, and delights in making software misbehave. He's probably the only member…
OpenAI is investigating more incidents of AI agents going rogue days after hack
OpenAI logo on Microsoft surface

It appears that the "AI agents going rogue" tale has more to it than what AI giants have revealed publicly so far. Merely days after OpenAI announced that its AI agents went rogue and hacked Hugging Face, Anthropic dropped a similar bombshell. Soon, it was discovered that not just one, but multiple services were compromised. Well, it seems there are even more layers to it.

Reuters reports that OpenAI has found more incidents of AI agents escaping their software containment environment during research. Citing sources with knowledge of the incident, the outlet notes that the AI agents didn't go beyond OpenAI's software environment and affect any external service.

Read more
AI is finding Apple security flaws faster than Apple can sort through them
Apple has limited how many bug reports researchers can keep open as AI tools produce both genuine Mac vulnerabilities and a flood of questionable submissions
Lighting, Architecture, Building

Apple has capped the number of security reports researchers can keep open at once after AI bug hunting put its review process under pressure, according to the Financial Times.

Some submissions describe hallucinated or purely theoretical risks. Others uncover vulnerabilities serious enough to require patches. Bynario told the FT that it found more than 50 possible macOS flaws in three weeks, including a privilege-escalation chain that could give an attacker full control of a Mac.

Read more
Anthropic is paying $1.5 billion over pirated books, but it can still legally cut up purchased ones
The settlement addressed unauthorized ebook downloads, not the destructive scanning of lawfully bought physical copies, a distinction now alarming booksellers
Book, Publication, Indoors

A federal judge has approved Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement over nearly half a million pirated books. The same litigation also protected a more physical method of feeding its AI systems. Anthropic bought print books, removed their bindings, scanned every page and destroyed the originals.

The legal divide came down to acquisition. The settlement covers books downloaded from LibGen and PiLiMi, while the court treated Anthropic’s one-for-one conversion of purchased books into private digital files as fair use. Training AI models on lawfully acquired material was also considered transformative.

Read more