Sam Schechner

Companies, including US tech giants, should be blocked from transferring European users’ data in some cases if they can’t guarantee it will be handled in compliance with European Union privacy laws, an adviser to the EU’s top court recommended. The recommendation, if followed by the EU’s Court of Justice, could unleash a 

Google has increasingly re-engineered and interfered with search results to a far greater degree than the company and its executives have acknowledged. Those actions often come in response to pressure from businesses, outside interest groups and governments around the world. They have increased sharply since the 2016 election and the rise of online misinformation. Google’s evolving approach marks a shift from its founding philosophy of “organizing the world’s information,” to one that is far more active in deciding how that information should appear.

Facebook has bowed to demands from European Union regulators to change what the bloc had called its misleading terms of service, the latest example of a broader effort by governments globally to exercise more control over tech firms.  The European Commission said that Facebook has agreed to address a list of outstanding concerns that it and a group of national consumer-protection authorities had articulated about the company’s terms of service. The changes will be made by June, the commission said.

Google and other search engines shouldn’t be forced to apply the European Union’s “right to be forgotten” beyond the bloc’s borders, an adviser to the EU’s top court argued. The recommendation—if followed by the EU’s Court of Justice—would be a major victory for Google, which has for three years been fighting an order from France’s privacy regulator to apply the EU principle globally.  Maciej Szpunar, an advocate general for the court, argued in a nonbinding opin

The European Union’s executive arm joined Google and a group of free-speech advocates to oppose expanding the bloc’s “right to be forgotten” beyond European borders. In arguments before the EU’s top court, the executive arm, as well as countries including Ireland and Greece, argued that a global application of the EU right would stretch the EU’s privacy laws beyond their intended scope—echoing at least some of Google’s arguments. “We don’t see extraterritoriality” in EU privacy law, said Antoine Buchet, a lawyer for the bloc’s executive arm, during questioning by EU judges.

Google will appeal an order to extend the European Union’s “right to be forgotten” to its search engines across the globe, arguing before the EU’s top court that the order encourages countries to assert sovereignty beyond their borders. National laws used to stop at the border. In cyberspace, they increasingly stretch around the world, as regulators in Europe, the US and Canada have started asserting legal authority over the internet across country lines.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the European Union’s new privacy law, is drawing advertising money toward Google’s online-ad services and away from competitors that are straining to show they’re complying with the sweeping regulation. The reason: the Alphabet ad giant is gathering individuals’ consent for targeted advertising at far higher rates than many competing online-ad services, early data show.

Apple’s tax bill is just the beginning. The European Union’s decision represents a new high-water mark in the bloc’s efforts to rein in alleged excesses of American tech giants. But it is also just the first shot in what is expected to be a busy autumn for European officials, who are pushing forward a raft of regulations and investigations aimed at altering the behavior of a cadre of US-based internet superpowers.

The moves are being taken by a host of players—from EU regulators in Brussels to a bevy of national authorities across the continent. They are targeting areas ranging from personal privacy to anti-competition issues. In coming weeks, EU bodies plan to debate new telecom rules that could expand to cover services like WhatsApp, proposed legislation to push news aggregators to pay newspapers for showing snippets of content, and potential audiovisual rules that would force companies like Netflix Inc. to finance European movies. At the same time, authorities in capitals like Brussels, Paris and Berlin are pursuing investigations involving big companies like Google, Amazon and Facebook, related to alleged tax avoidance, anticompetitive behavior and privacy concerns.

Apparently, T-Mobile US denied Iliad’s request for access to the US telecommunications provider's books after determining that the French company's proposed $15 billion bid wasn't strong enough.

The French government asked the country's antitrust authority to study whether Iliad, France's new cut-rate mobile-phone operator, is benefiting from a sweetheart roaming agreement, potentially giving ammunition to incumbent companies that have argued the deal is forcing them to cut jobs.

France's independent competition watchdog said that it will give an opinion by the end of February on whether Iliad's Free Mobile, France's fourth mobile-phone operator, would gain a "lasting advantage" over competitors if it extends its roaming agreement with partly state-owned France Télécom SA, the country's largest mobile-phone operator by subscribers.

The government also asked the authority to weigh in on whether France's mobile operators can pool resources to roll out shared wireless networks in rural areas, as well as whether the operators can share wireless networks in urban areas "without harming competition, jobs and investment."