News of the Cyber World

[kyonides]

Republicans Subpoena Head of CDC
Over Big Tech Censorship Coordination

The U.S. House of Representatives has subpoenaed several top Biden administration officials, including the director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), over the administration’s coordination with Big Tech to censor users.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, sent the subpoenas on April 28 to CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Director Jen Easterly, and James Rubin, an official at the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC).

All three have responded inadequately to requests to provide documents, including communications between their respective entities and social media platforms, Jordan said in letters accompanying the subpoenas. CISA and GEC have not responded at all to the requests, while the CDC has not provided any of the requested documents, he said.

“Freedom of speech is one of the most important rights we have in this country,” Jordan told the Washington Examiner. “The collusion between our federal government and Big Tech undermines First Amendment principles and should be investigated.”
...
A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, CISA’s parent agency, said that the department “does not censor speech and does not request that content be taken down by social media companies.”

“Instead of working with the Department, as numerous committees have done this Congress, the House Judiciary Committee has unnecessarily escalated to a subpoena,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email, adding that the agency “will continue cooperating appropriately with Congressional oversight requests, all while faithfully working to protect our nation from terrorism and targeted violence, secure our borders, respond to natural disasters, defend against cyberattacks, and more.”

Federal Court Rejects Google’s Motion to Dismiss Antitrust Lawsuit

A Virginia district court on April 28 rejected Google’s request to dismiss an antitrust lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) about the company’s advertising business.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, accuses Google of monopolizing key digital advertising technologies, known as the “ad tech stack,” in violation of antitrust laws. These technologies are crucial for website publishers to sell ads and for advertisers to reach potential customers.

Eric Mahr, Google’s lawyer, argued that the government’s claim of Google being a monopoly was not justified as the company’s ad business does not meet the 70 percent market share benchmark. He also cited other social media platforms such as Facebook and Tiktok as viable options for advertisers.

In court documents, Google drew a comparison to an unsuccessful antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation, a concert promoter that was accused of holding a monopoly on outdoor amphitheaters. The lawsuit was dismissed because the plaintiffs did not consider alternative options such as indoor concert halls and arenas.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema highlighted that the key issue in the case will be how to define the market in which Google is accused of having a monopoly. However, she deemed the government’s claims plausible enough to continue with the case, even though the government’s burden of proof will increase during the trial.
...
This marks Google’s second loss in the Alexandria federal court. Earlier, Google had tried to consolidate the case with a related lawsuit in New York, which had been ongoing for years. However, Brinkema rejected Google’s request and ordered the case to be heard in the Alexandria courthouse.

Nine states, including Arizona, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Washington, and West Virginia, joined eight others as plaintiffs in the antitrust lawsuit against Google earlier this month.

Many times we have heard these monopolistic giants say that limiting their share of the market deters investment and technological innovation. How easily they forget how they have been firing employees like never before.
 Were are those impressive investments?
What about all those professionals that were working on innovative projects that still got kicked out in the past 12 months?