- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Japan’s Antitrust Watchdog Demands Google Address Advertising Restrictions Impacting Yahoo In Japan
Japan’s Antitrust Watchdog Demands Google Address Advertising Restrictions Impacting Yahoo In Japan
Japan’s antitrust watchdog has taken on the US tech giant Google for adopting unfair trade practices in the advertising market. On Monday, the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) stated that US search giant Google must address its advertising search restrictions affecting Yahoo in Japan. The JFTC’s recent study of Google’s practices revealed that it was undermining fair competition in the advertising market.
Google's purportedly questionable practices date back about a decade and persisted for over seven years, as per the commission's findings. Google will undergo scrutiny for the next three years to ensure the implementation of necessary changes. No immediate fines or penalties have been imposed on Google, which maintains its popularity among Japanese users.
The commission's action comes on the heels of another setback for Google in Japan. Just last week, Japanese doctors initiated a civil lawsuit against the company, seeking damages for what they allege are unfounded derogatory and frequently false comments.
The lawsuit filed in the Tokyo District Court seeks 1.4 million yen ($9,400) in damages for 63 medical professionals, concerning reviews posted on Google Maps.
In response, Google stated that it is tirelessly working "around the clock" to diminish misleading or false information on its platform. It highlighted its efforts to combine human and technological resources in order to promptly remove fraudulent reviews.