Business
Google avoids break-up but must share data with rivals
Lily JamaliNorth America Technology Correspondent, San Francisco and
Rachel ClunBusiness reporter, BBC News
ReutersGoogle will not have to sell its Chrome web browser but must share information with competitors, a US federal judge has ordered.
The remedies decided by District Judge Amit Mehta have emerged after a years-long court battle over Google’s dominance in online search.
The case centred around Google’s position as the default search engine on a range of its own products such as Android and Chrome as well as others made by the likes of Apple.
The US Department of Justice had demanded that Google sell Chrome – Tuesday’s decision means the tech giant can keep it but it will be barred from having exclusive contracts and must share search data with rivals.
Google had proposed less drastic solutions, such as limiting its revenue-sharing agreements with firms like Apple to make its search engine the default on their devices and browsers.
On Tuesday, the company indicated that it viewed the ruling as a victory, and said the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) probably contributed to the outcome.
“Today’s decision recognizes how much the industry has changed through the advent of AI, which is giving people so many more ways to find information,” Google said in a statement after the ruling.
“This underlines what we’ve been saying since this case was filed in 2020: Competition is intense and people can easily choose the services they want,” the statement continued.
The tech giant had denied wrongdoing since charges were first filed against it in 2020, saying its market dominance is because its search engine is a superior product to others and consumers simply prefer it to others.
Last year, Judge Mehta ruled that Google had used unfair methods to establish a monopoly over the online search market, actively working to maintain a level of dominance to the extent it broke US law.
But in his decision, Judge Mehta said a complete sell-off of Chrome was “a poor fit for this case”.
Google will also not have to sell off its Android operating system, which powers most of the world’s smartphones.
The company had argued that off-loading parts of its operations, such as Android, would mean they would effectively stop working properly.
“Today’s remedy order agreed with the need to restore competition to the long-monopolized search market, and we are now weighing our options and thinking through whether the ordered relief goes far enough in serving that goal,” Assistant Attorney General Abigail Slater wrote on X after the ruling.
Shares in Alphabet, Google’s parent company, jumped by more than 8% after the ruling.
Smartphone-makers such as Apple, Samsung and Motorola will also benefit.
Before the ruling, Google paid such firms billions of dollars to exclusively pre-load or promote the tech company’s products.
It was revealed at trial that Google paid more than $26bn for such deals with Apple, Mozilla and others in 2021.
Now, Google will not be allowed to enter into any exclusive contracts for Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant or the Gemini app.
It means phone manufacturers will be free to pre-load or promote other search engines, browsers or AI assistants alongside Google’s.
Gene Munster, managing partner at Deepwater Asset Management, said the ruling was “good news for big tech”.
“Apple also gets a nice win because the ruling forces Google to renegotiate the search deal annually,” he said on X.
Judge Mehta’s ruling “doesn’t seem to be as draconian as the market was expecting,” said Melissa Otto, head of research at S&P Global Visible Alpha.
With Google’s search operation expected to generate close to $200bn this year, and tens of billions of that expected to go to distribution partners it is a win-win for the major corporate players involved in the case, Ms Otto said.
The decision is not the end of the tech giant’s court battles.
Later this month, Google is scheduled to go to trial in a separate case brought by the justice department where a judge found the company holds illegal monopolies in online advertising technology.
Snapchat’s parent Snap has settled a social media addiction lawsuit just days before the landmark case was due to go to trial in Los Angeles.
Terms of the deal were not announced as it was revealed by lawyers at a California Superior Court hearing, after which Snap told the BBC the parties were “pleased to have been able to resolve this matter in an amicable manner”.
Other defendants in the case include Instagram parent Meta, ByteDance’s TikTok and Alphabet’s YouTube, none of which have settled.
The plaintiff, a 19-year old woman identified by the initials K.G.M., alleged that the algorithmic design of the platforms left her addicted and affected her mental health.
In the absence of a settlement with the other parties, the trial is scheduled to go forward against the remaining three defendants, with jury selection due to begin on 27 January.
Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg is expected to testify, and until Tuesday’s settlement, Snap CEO Evan Spiegel was also set to take the stand.
Meta, TikTok and Alphabet did not respond to BBC inquiries seeking reaction to the settlement.
Snap is still a defendant in other social media addiction cases that have been consolidated in the court.
The closely watched cases could challenge a legal theory that social media companies have used to shield themselves.
They have long argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 protects them from liability for what third parties post on their platforms.
But plaintiffs argue that the platforms are designed in a way that leaves users addicted through choices that affect their algorithms and notifications.
The social media companies have said the plaintiffs’ evidence falls short of proving that they are responsible for alleged harms such as depression and eating disorders.
Adverts for five tanning companies have been banned for making misleading and irresponsible claims about the safety of sunbeds.
Ads for tanning studios The Sun Company, SunShine Co and Tanbox Towcester, as well as for Tan & Deliver Home Hire Sunbeds and Byrokko, which sells products to accelerate tanning, made “a number of problematic claims” about safety, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said.
Their misleading and irresponsible claims included that sunbed use is safe or that tanning can be achieved safely, and that sunbeds could boost vitamin D, improve mood and energy levels, and treat health conditions such as seasonal affective disorder (SAD), psoriasis and eczema.
The ASA said it found the ads using its AI-powered Active Ad Monitoring system.
The watchdog said the rulings come amid public health concerns about the risks of ultraviolet (UV) exposure and the continued popularity of tanning, with some experts highlighting the role of social media in promoting and normalising sunbed use.
Long-standing advice from the NHS and Cancer Research UK says there is no safe or healthy way to get a tan using UV radiation.
Cancer Research UK warns that sunbeds use high-intensity UV radiation for quick tanning which can damage the DNA in skin cells. This can lead to skin cancer, including melanoma, which is the most serious type.
Too much UV radiation is the third biggest cause of cancer and the main cause of skin cancer in the UK.
The ASA said the ads for all five firms were irresponsible and likely to mislead people for downplaying the risks or presenting tanning as beneficial to health.
Some of the ads also implied that sunbeds could be used to help manage medical conditions, which risked discouraging people from seeking appropriate medical advice or treatment, it added.
All five advertisers have been told the banned ads must not appear again, and that future advertising must not suggest that sunbeds are safe, provide health benefits or can be used to treat medical conditions.
The ASA’s regulatory projects manager, Jess Tye, said: “Given the serious dangers of UV exposure, it’s vital that ads for sunbeds don’t suggest that they’re safe or offer health benefits.
“These rulings demonstrate that information about health in ads must be clear, accurate and responsible.
“Protecting people from misleading or irresponsible ads is at the heart of our work and we’ll take action where ads break the rules by putting people at risk.”
All five firms have been approached for comment.
The Sun Company said: “We acknowledge the ASA’s ruling in relation to an early social media post made shortly after opening. The specific content referenced in the ruling has been removed, and we have reviewed our advertising practices to ensure full compliance going forward.
“Customer transparency and regulatory compliance are important to us.”
A United Airlines airplane at the George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Nov. 6, 2025.
Brandon Bell | Getty Images
United Airlines on Tuesday said it could generate record earnings this year thanks to strong travel demand, with sales of premium seats, business travel and no-frills tickets robust in recent weeks.
The carrier expects adjusted earnings per share of between $12 and $14 this year, in line with the $13.16 analysts expected. For the first quarter, United forecast per-share earnings of $1 to $1.50, while analysts had estimated $1.13 a share.
United joined its rival Delta Air Lines in forecasting potential record earnings for the year. The two carriers accounted for almost all of the U.S. airline industry’s profit in the first nine months of 2025. Other airlines are set to report later this month.
United’s unit revenue fell 1.6% in the fourth quarter compared with last year. Still, United said premium revenue rose 9% in the fourth quarter and 11% for the full year over 2024. Restrictive basic-economy ticket sales, which compete with discount airlines, were up 7% in the last three months of 2025.
Most airlines are chasing revenue from higher-priced tickets like first class, racing to add in fresh, new cabins that command a premium.
Here is what United Airlines reported for the quarter that ended Dec. 31 compared with what Wall Street was expecting, based on estimates compiled by LSEG:
- Earnings per share: $3.10 adjusted vs. $2.94 expected
- Revenue: $15.4 billion vs. $15.4 billion expected
The carrier’s fourth-quarter profit rose 6% from a year earlier to $1.04 billion, or $3.19 a share, while capacity rose 6.5% from the same period in 2024. Adjusting for one-time items, United posted earnings of $1.01 billion, or $3.10 a share.
United CEO Scott Kirby has expressed confidence in the airline’s growth plan, saying in an interview with CNBC last year that “customers are choosing us.”
The longest-ever government shutdown, in the fourth quarter, hit pretax United results by $250 million, the company said. Air traffic controller shortages sparked delays and dented bookings but travel recovered, airline executives said.
United reported adjusted, full-year 2025 earnings of $10.20 a share, up 8% year over year, after the carrier had previously lowered its forecast for the year. The airline also reported adjusted net income of $3.5 billion for the year, up 6% from a year earlier.
Carlos Beltran, Andruw Jones elected to Baseball Hall of Fame
Maybelline names Teens in Times as brand ambassadors
Carlos Beltrán elected to Hall of Fame despite Astros sign-stealing scandal
-
Tech1 week agoNew Proposed Legislation Would Let Self-Driving Cars Operate in New York State
-
Entertainment1 week agoX (formerly Twitter) recovers after brief global outage affects thousands
-
Sports6 days agoPak-Australia T20 series tickets sale to begin tomorrow – SUCH TV
-
Politics4 days agoSaudi King Salman leaves hospital after medical tests
-
Business5 days agoTrump’s proposed ban on buying single-family homes introduces uncertainty for family offices
-
Tech5 days agoMeta’s Layoffs Leave Supernatural Fitness Users in Mourning
-
Tech6 days agoTwo Thinking Machines Lab Cofounders Are Leaving to Rejoin OpenAI
-
Fashion4 days agoBangladesh, Nepal agree to fast-track proposed PTA