Another year, another European Commission fine for an antitrust violation. This time, the target of the fine is none other than Google. In what could be the most important antitrust ruling in recent years (which overshadows even Microsoft's 2004 browser fine), the EC has found that Google has systematically worked towards increasing prominence in search results to those displayed by the company's own comparison shopping service, dubbed "Google Shopping". "Google Shopping" started in 2004, when Google entered the comparison shopping market in Europe, with a product that was initially called "Froogle", renamed "Google Product Search" in 2008 and since 2013 has been called "Google Shopping".

However, it would seem that Froogle wasn't all that successful. When Google entered the comparison shopping markets with Froogle, there were already a number of established players, which dampened the company's market foray. The EC states that Google was aware that Froogle's market performance was relatively poor, pointing to one internal document from 2006 that stated, quite plainly, that "Froogle simply doesn't work".

Russian-based Kaspersky Labs is backing away from its earlier threat of an antitrust case filing with the European Commission, instead opting for a "wait and see" approach with regards to its complaints with Microsoft over Windows 10 and its included security software "Windows Defender."

Kaspersky Labs has been threatening to press an antitrust action since November 2016, when in a November blog post titled "That's it. I've had enough!" Chief Executive Eugene Kaspersky complained that Microsoft did not give developers ample time to prepare for a new Windows release, and was using their "compatibility checker" tool to effectively remove competing software in favor of Windows Defender.

Lenovo announced today that conditions for Lenovo's acquisition of IBM's x86 server business have been satisfied and the parties anticipate they will begin closing the transaction effective on October 1, 2014. The acquisition will make Lenovo the third-largest player in the $42.1 billion global x86 server market. Lenovo is acquiring System x, BladeCenter and Flex System blade servers and switches, x86-based Flex integrated systems, NeXtScale and iDataPlex servers and associated software, blade networking and maintenance operations. IBM will retain its System z mainframes, Power Systems, Storage Systems, Power-based Flex servers, PureApplication and PureData appliances.

"With the close of the x86 acquisition, Lenovo will add a world-class business that extends our capabilities in enterprise hardware and services, immediately making us a strong number three in the global server market," said Yang Yuanqing, chairman and CEO of Lenovo. "Now, our priorities are to ensure a smooth integration and deliver a seamless transition for customers. By combining Lenovo's global reach, efficiency and operational excellence with IBM's legendary quality, innovation and service, I am confident that we will have competitive advantages to help us drive profitable growth and build Lenovo into a global enterprise leader."

Antec, the global leader in high-performance computer enclosures, power supplies, and mobile accessories today announced that their lines of power supplies are compliant with the ErP Lot 26:2014 regulation. With this directive, the European Commission aims at reducing the environmental impact of energy-related products (ErPs). The regulation established a framework for setting Ecodesign requirements (such as energy efficiency requirements) for all ErPs in the residential, tertiary and industrial sectors.

The production, distribution, use and end-of-life management of energy-related products is associated with important impacts on the environment. The new system-based energy consumption regulation no. 617/2013 of June 26 2013 is implementing the directive 2009/125/EC by the European Union regarding the stand-by and total power consumption of desktop computer systems, small scale servers and notebooks. It requires the System Integrators and VARs of such systems to provide a wealth of power consumption-related metrics of the system together with the "normal" product information to end users.

LG Electronics Inc. confirms that it has been imposed an administrative fine of €491,567,000 by the European Commission for allegedly infringing European competition law with regard to the sale of cathode ray tubes in the late 1990s and up to 2006. LG Electronics is currently reviewing the European Commission's decision with the intention to appeal the decision.

The European Commission contends that LG Electronics is liable for the period prior to July 2001 when it made and sold cathode ray tubes in addition to a period after that date, even though it had transferred its cathode ray tube business to LG Philips Displays, a joint venture between LG Electronics and Royal Philips Electronics NV. In 2006, LG Philips Displays went bankrupt.

The European Commission has fined seven international groups of companies a total of € 1,470,515,000 for participating in either one or both of two distinct cartels in the sector of cathode ray tubes ("CRT"). For almost ten years, between 1996 and 2006, these companies fixed prices, shared markets, allocated customers between themselves and restricted their output.

One cartel concerned colour picture tubes used for televisions and the other one colour display tubes used in computer monitors. The cartels operated worldwide. The infringements found by the Commission therefore cover the entire European Economic Area (EEA). Chunghwa, LG Electronics, Philips and Samsung SDI participated in both cartels, while Panasonic, Toshiba, MTPD (currently a Panasonic subsidiary) and Technicolor (formerly Thomson) participated only in the cartel for television tubes. Chunghwa received full immunity from fines under the Commission's 2006 Leniency Notice for the two cartels, as it was the first to reveal their existence to the Commission. Other companies received reductions of their fines for their cooperation in the investigation under the Commission's leniency programme.

The European Commission has informed Microsoft of its preliminary view that Microsoft has failed to comply with its commitments to offer users a choice screen enabling them to easily choose their preferred web browser. In 2009, the Commission had made these commitments legally binding on Microsoft (see IP/09/1941). The sending of a statement of objections does not prejudge the final outcome of the investigation.

In its statement of objections, the Commission takes the preliminary view that Microsoft has failed to roll out the browser choice screen with its Windows 7 Service Pack 1, which was released in February 2011. From February 2011 until July 2012, millions of Windows users in the EU may not have seen the choice screen. Microsoft has acknowledged that the choice screen was not displayed during that period.

According to a report, European Commission is planning to level a criminal case against Microsoft for failing to meet the conditions laid down by the judgement of a 2009 case that forced Microsoft to strip its Internet Explorer browser from Windows operating system copies sold in the EU, and presenting new installations of the OS with a browser selection menu. With the advent of Windows 7 SP1, the browser selection menu was not implemented for tens of millions of PCs (out of an error, Microsoft argues). The new case could lead to penalties in billions of Euros for Microsoft.

Optical disc drives are components buyers are least bothered about, when purchasing parts to build a PC, or replace a broken one. The EU's regulators have found something fishy even with companies making these roughly-20€ PC components. According to the European Commission (EC), 13 optical disc drive vendors may have conspired to fix prices of their products on a global scale, and that affects European consumers, as well.

The EC is investigating 13 drive suppliers, and 2 major PC OEMs (pre-built PC vendors), for conducting and participating in what is known as bid rigging scheme, a serious antitrust violation. In bid rigging schemes, the bidders and contractees conspire to rig their prices so that a particular supplier wins the bid. Penalties for such a violation include 10% of worldwide turnover set as fines.

Around three years after the European Commission slapped Intel with a record €1.06 billion fine for anti-competitive practices against market rival AMD, the company appealed against the fine, on grounds that the commission relied on "profoundly inadequate" evidence to establish anti-competition charges against the company, which lead to the fine. A 5-member bench of General Court in Luxembourg, Europe's second highest, will hear arguments of both Intel and EU's regulators, during a 4-day hearing. Intel wants its conviction quashed and its fine reduced/removed. According to European regulators, major computer manufacturers such as HP, Dell, and Lenovo, received unfair rebates from Intel for opting for its chips. The case is T-286/09, Intel vs Commission.

The European Commission has opened two formal antitrust investigations against Motorola Mobility Inc. The Commission will assess whether Motorola has abusively, and in contravention of commitments it gave to standard setting organisations, used certain of its standard essential patents to distort competition in the Internal Market in breach of EU antitrust rules. The opening of proceedings means that the Commission will examine the cases as a matter of priority. It does not prejudge the outcome of the investigations.

Following complaints by Apple and Microsoft, the Commission will investigate, in particular, whether by seeking and enforcing injunctions against Apple's and Microsoft's flagship products such as iPhone, iPad, Windows and Xbox on the basis of patents it had declared essential to produce standard-compliant products, Motorola has failed to honour its irrevocable commitments made to standard setting organisations. In these commitments, Motorola engaged to license those standard-essential patents on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The Commission will examine whether Motorola's behaviour amounts to an abuse of a dominant market position prohibited by Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU).

Cisco expressed concerns with the EU over Microsoft's takeover of Skype. In 2011, Microsoft clinched a deal which saw it takeover Skype for a staggering US $8.5 billion. Perhaps we're now getting to see just how valuable the acquisition was, as Microsoft is now sitting on some key telecommunication over IP intellectual property that has Cisco concerned that Microsoft could restrict video-conferencing technologies to other companies and impede competition. Interestingly, the European Commission gave a go-ahead to Microsoft during its acquisition, judging that the takeover wouldn't impede competition.

In a blog post by video conferencing head Martin De Beer, Cisco stated that it "does not oppose the merger, but believes the European Commission should have placed conditions that would ensure greater standards-based interoperability." Cisco called for making Microsoft's freshly-acquired IP "open-standards", stating that otherwise, Microsoft could control "the future of video communications". "Making a video-to-video call should be as easy as dialling a phone number," De Beer argued. It's "intellectual-property" when convenient, "open-standard" when not, in the funny world of tech-patents.

Today Fox Business is reporting U.S. and European regulators approved Google Inc's $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola Mobility on Monday and said they would keep a sharp eye on the web search giant to ensure patents critical to the telecom industry would be licensed at fair prices. The U.S. Justice Department also approved an Apple Inc -led consortium's purchase of a trove of patents from bankrupt Canadian company Nortel Networks.Both the Justice Department and European antitrust authorities said that they would monitor how patents are used to ensure they comply with antitrust rules. Antitrust enforcers on both sides of the Atlantic are concerned that patents essential to ensuring communications devices sold by different companies work together are licensed for a reasonable fee.

The European Commission has opened a formal investigation to assess whether Samsung Electronics has abusively, and in contravention of a commitment it gave to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI), used certain of its standard essential patent rights to distort competition in European mobile device markets, in breach of EU antitrust rules. The opening of proceedings means that the Commission will examine the case as a matter of priority. It does not prejudge the outcome of the investigation.

In 2011, Samsung sought injunctive relief in various Member States' courts against competing mobile device makers based on alleged infringements of certain of its patent rights which it has declared essential to implement European mobile telephony standards. The Commission will investigate, in particular, whether in doing so Samsung has failed to honour its irrevocable commitment given in 1998 to the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) to license any standard essential patents relating to European mobile telephony standards on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. The Commission will examine whether such behaviour amounts to an abuse of a dominant position prohibited by Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU).