GOOG Jan 2020 1000.000 put

OPR - OPR Delayed Price. Currency in USD
0.6000
-0.3000 (-33.33%)
As of 3:01PM EST. Market open.
Stock chart is not supported by your current browser
Previous Close0.9000
Open0.6000
Bid0.5000
Ask0.7500
Strike1,000.00
Expire Date2020-01-17
Day's Range0.6000 - 0.7000
Contract RangeN/A
Volume11
Open InterestN/A
  • Google probe to expand into search and Android: RPT
    Yahoo Finance Video

    Google probe to expand into search and Android: RPT

    The 50 attorneys general investigating Google’s advertising practices are expanding the antitrust probe into the company’s Android business as well.

  • Google's collection of medical records sparks privacy concerns
    CBS News Videos

    Google's collection of medical records sparks privacy concerns

    The apparent whistleblower who revealed Google is collecting medical records from about 50 million Americans said "Project Nightingale" raised red flags, including a security risk of "placing medical data in the digital cloud." Google said it's using the information to improve health care and reduce medical costs, under strict privacy and security standards. Wired Editor-in-Chief Nick Thomson joins "CBS This Morning" to discuss the privacy and security concerns.

  • Google gears up to launch streaming game service Stadia
    Reuters Videos

    Google gears up to launch streaming game service Stadia

    Google is calling its upcoming game streaming service "a revolution for the industry". Stadia will be released on November 19th and available in 14 countries. It will let consumers play video games across multiple devices in their home without downloads, making access to games potentially as easy as watching a video on YouTube. Google's vice president Phil Harrison says games are streamed from Google data centres, while a Chromecast Ultra device is plugged into a television to make the connection. (SOUNDBITE) (English) GOOGLE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER, PHIL HARRISON, SAYING: "The graphics chip that we have in our version one hardware, which is what gamers will be playing this November, is equivalent to the latest, greatest game consoles combined. It is the most powerful place to play and it delivers the most incredible gaming experience for players." Analysts have said the service could significantly boost returns from Google's huge investments in cloud software and data centers. Wired UK Editor Greg Williams: (SOUNDBITE) (English) WIRED UK EDITOR, GREG WILLIAMS, SAYING: . "If you think about what Netflix did to television for instance and movies or what Spotify has done to music, that idea of streaming on demand when you want it is a really powerful one. Now, Stadia will be slightly different in that it isn't an all you can eat style platform, you will have to pay for some individual games, but what's interesting is that Google has so many advantages in the space right now" The Stadia Founder's Edition package, priced at $129, will enable people to play video games such as Destiny 2 from the launch day. But Google faces competition from gaming and tech companies planning similar services. Analysts have also questioned whether top game publishers will be prepared to shift from the lucrative business of selling games on discs. Nvidia, Sony and Microsoft have also been exploring streaming options. The latter two dominate the $100 billion global games market outside China.

  • Gmail shows the true potential of a Google checking account
    Yahoo Finance

    Gmail shows the true potential of a Google checking account

    Google is getting into checking accounts. Banks should be nervous. Just look at what happened with Gmail.

  • Google Gets Supreme Court Hearing in Oracle Copyright Clash
    Bloomberg

    Google Gets Supreme Court Hearing in Oracle Copyright Clash

    (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal from Alphabet Inc.’s Google in a multibillion-dollar clash that has divided Silicon Valley, agreeing to decide whether the company improperly used copyrighted programming code owned by Oracle Corp. in the Android operating system.The justices said they’ll review a federal appeals court’s conclusion that Google violated Oracle’s copyrights. Oracle says it’s entitled to at least $8.8 billion in damages.The case, which the court will resolve by July, promises to reshape the U.S. legal protections for software code, particularly the interfaces that let programs and devices communicate with one another. Google contends the appeals court ruling would make it harder to use interfaces to develop new applications.The ruling “has upended the computer industry’s longstanding expectation that developers are free to use software interfaces to build new computer programs,” Google argued.The appeals court decision reversed a jury finding that Google’s copying was a legitimate “fair use” of Oracle’s Java programming language.“There is nothing fair about taking a copyrighted work verbatim and using it for the same purpose and function as the original in a competing platform,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said in a 3-0 ruling.At issue are pre-written directions known as application program interfaces, or APIs, which provide instructions for such functions as connecting to the internet or accessing certain types of files. By using those shortcuts, programmers don’t have to write code from scratch for every function in their software, or change it for every type of device.Oracle says the Java APIs are freely available to those who want to build applications that run on computers and mobile devices. But the company says it requires a license to use the shortcuts for a competing platform or to embed them in an electronic device.“We are confident the Supreme Court will preserve long established copyright protections for original software and reject Google’s continuing efforts to avoid responsibility for copying Oracle’s innovations,” said Deborah Hellinger, an Oracle spokeswoman. “In the end, a finding that Google infringed Oracle’s original works will promote, not stifle, future innovation.”Oracle says Google was facing an existential threat because its search engine -- the source of its advertising revenue -- wasn’t being used on smartphones. Google bought the Android mobile operating system in 2005 and copied Java code to attract developers but refused to take a license, Oracle contends.‘Incalculable’ Harm“Naturally, it inflicted incalculable market harm on Oracle,” Oracle told the Supreme Court. “This is the epitome of copyright infringement, whether the work is a news report, a manual, or computer software.”Android generated $42 billion for Google between 2007 and 2016, according to Oracle court filings. Google said it welcomed the court’s decision to review the case.“We hope that the court reaffirms the importance of software interoperability in American competitiveness,” said Google’s chief legal officer, Kent Walker. “Developers should be able to create applications across platforms and not be locked into one company’s software.”At the Supreme Court, Google argues that software interfaces are categorically ineligible for copyright protection. Google also contends that the Federal Circuit restricted the “fair use” defense to copyright infringement so much as to make it impossible for a developer to reuse an interface in a new application.“What Oracle is seeking here is nothing less than complete control over a community of developers that have invested in learning the free and open Java language,” Google argued.The Trump administration is backing Oracle at the Supreme Court and urged the justices to reject the appeal. Microsoft Corp., Mozilla Corp. and Red Hat Inc. are among the companies that urged the Supreme Court to give Google a hearing.The appeal encompasses two decisions by the Federal Circuit in the six-year-long battle. The first is a 2014 decision that the programming language can be copyrighted, and the second is a 2018 ruling that overturned the jury’s verdict of “fair use.” The Supreme Court had previously rejected Google’s petition over the 2014 decision.If Oracle wins, the case will go back to a federal jury in California, where the only issue will be how much Google should pay in damages. Should Google win on either question, that would end the case.The case is Google v. Oracle America, 18-956.(Updates with company comments beginning in ninth paragraph.)\--With assistance from Naomi Nix.To contact the reporters on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net;Susan Decker in Washington at sdecker1@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Joe Sobczyk at jsobczyk@bloomberg.net, Elizabeth Wasserman, Jon MorganFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Airbnb Hosts Will Be Able to Pay to Fast-Track Verification of Their Listings
    Skift

    Airbnb Hosts Will Be Able to Pay to Fast-Track Verification of Their Listings

    Airbnb is moving ahead with plans to verify all of its home listings, adding its experiences offering to that pledge, the company said Friday. Still, it is grappling with how to carry this out on such a massive scale. In an earlier Recode Decode podcast, CEO Brian Chesky said Airbnb plans to let Airbnb hosts […]

  • Don't be a pest: Carlyle Group co-founder and billionaire David Rubenstein on asking for money
    American City Business Journals

    Don't be a pest: Carlyle Group co-founder and billionaire David Rubenstein on asking for money

    The room was packed with the CEOs of companies that Case and his fund have invested in, as his semi-regular bus tour and investment ethos has grown into two formalized funds with big-name backers, including Rubenstein, Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) CEO Eric Schmidt, Spanx founder Sara Blakely, fellow Revolution co-founder Ted Leonsis, the Koch family and former eBay and Hewlett-Packard chief Meg Whitman. "You shouldn’t ever be saying 'I am sorry to ask you for money.' Because if you are sorry to ask somebody for money don’t ask the person for money," Rubenstein said. "There is a big difference between being a pest and bothering somebody and then being somewhat persistent," Rubenstein said.

  • U.S. Supreme Court to hear Google bid to end Oracle copyright suit
    Reuters

    U.S. Supreme Court to hear Google bid to end Oracle copyright suit

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear Google's bid to escape Oracle Corp's multi-billion dollar lawsuit accusing Google of infringing software copyrights to build the Android operating system that runs most of the world's smartphones. Google has appealed a lower court ruling reviving the suit in which Oracle has sought at least $8 billion in damages. A jury cleared Google in 2016, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington overturned that decision in 2018, finding that Google's inclusion of Oracle's software code in Android did not constitute a fair use under U.S. copyright law.

  • MarketWatch

    Supreme Court says it will hear Oracle vs. Google copyright suit

    A major copyright dispute stretching to 2010 between Oracle Corp. and Alphabet Inc.'s Google division is headed to the Supreme Court, the court said on Friday. The dispute centers on 11,500 lines of code that Google is accused of copying from Oracle's Java programming language, Oracle claims in a 9-year-old lawsuit seeking $9 billion in damages. Google, which deployed the code in Android, had won in lower courts but lost an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which ruled last year for Oracle.

  • Reuters

    UPDATE 3-U.S. Supreme Court to hear Google bid to end Oracle copyright suit

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear Google's bid to escape Oracle Corp's multi-billion dollar lawsuit accusing Google of infringing software copyrights to build the Android operating system that runs most of the world's smartphones. Google has appealed a lower court ruling reviving the suit in which Oracle has sought at least $8 billion in damages. A jury cleared Google in 2016, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington overturned that decision in 2018, finding that Google's inclusion of Oracle's software code in Android did not constitute a fair use under U.S. copyright law.

  • Reuters

    UPDATE 1-Alphabet features self-driving garbage cans, apartment noise monitors in Toronto smart city project

    Alphabet's Sidewalk Labs has provided more details on the technology it intends to use to develop a futuristic smart city in Toronto, which includes self-driving garbage cans and infra-red sensors to track foot traffic in stores, a document released by the company on Friday said. Waterfront Toronto, the agency in charge of developing the waterfront area of Canada's biggest city, gave a tentative approval to the project two weeks ago after Sidewalk agreed to walk back many of its original proposals, including putting all data collected into an Urban Data Trust, which critics said would not be subject to adequate oversight. The 12-acre project, close to Toronto's central business district, would feature adaptive street design and responsive sounds to help blind people find their way around, the document showed.

  • Factbox: How social media sites handle political ads
    Reuters

    Factbox: How social media sites handle political ads

    In the United States, the Communications Act prevents broadcast stations from rejecting or censoring ads from candidates for federal office once they have accepted advertising for that political race, although this does not apply to cable networks like CNN, or to social media sites, where leading presidential candidates are spending millions to target voters in the run-up to the November 2020 election. Facebook exempts politicians from its third-party fact-checking program, allowing them to run ads with false claims.

  • Barrons.com

    Retirement Savers Are Turning to Dividend Stocks for Income. Here’s How to Use Them in Your Portfolio.

    Investors are increasingly turning to equities with cash payouts for their nest eggs. But the strategies carry risk if not done right.

  • Barrons.com

    Google Is Facing More Legal Scrutiny. Investors Don’t Seem Worried.

    The stock of Google parent company Alphabet are up almost 28% since the Wall Street Journal reported in June that the Justice Department was preparing an antitrust investigation of Google.

  • GuruFocus.com

    TCI Fund Bulks Up on Alphabet in 3rd Quarter

    A look at Christopher Hohn's market-beating hedge fund Continue reading...

  • Alphabet features self-driving garbage cans, apartment noise monitors in Toronto smart city project
    Reuters

    Alphabet features self-driving garbage cans, apartment noise monitors in Toronto smart city project

    Alphabet's Sidewalk Labs has provided more details on the technology it intends to use to develop a futuristic smart city in Toronto, which includes self-driving garbage cans and infra-red sensors to track foot traffic in stores, a document released by the company on Friday said. Waterfront Toronto, the agency in charge of developing the waterfront area of Canada's biggest city, gave a tentative approval to the project two weeks ago after Sidewalk agreed to walk back many of its original proposals, including putting all data collected into an Urban Data Trust, which critics said would not be subject to adequate oversight. The 12-acre project, close to Toronto's central business district, would feature adaptive street design and responsive sounds to help blind people find their way around, the document showed.

  • Report: Google antitrust probe to expand into search and Android businesses
    American City Business Journals

    Report: Google antitrust probe to expand into search and Android businesses

    The 50 state attorneys general who have launched an antitrust investigation into Google are reportedly getting ready to expand their probe to also include the Mountain View-based company's search and Android businesses, after previously explicitly focusing only on its online advertising business.

  • TheStreet.com

    Supreme Court to Hear Oracle's Copyright Case Against Google

    Oracle first sued Google back in 2010 for allegedly stealing code that eventually ended up in Android phones.

  • Quantum Leap for Computing Is a Small Step for Computers
    Bloomberg

    Quantum Leap for Computing Is a Small Step for Computers

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- In a landmark paper published in 1950, the mathematician Alan Turing proposed the eponymous Turing Test to decide whether a computer can demonstrate human-like intelligence. To pass the test, the computer must fool a human judge into believing it’s a person after a five-minute conversation conducted via text. Turing predicted that by the year 2000, a computer would be able to convince 30% of human judges; that criterion became a touchstone of artificial intelligence.Although it took a bit longer than Turing predicted, a Russian chatbot presenting itself as a 13-year-old Ukrainian boy named Eugene Goostman was able to dupe 33% of judges in a competition held in 2014. Perhaps the cleverest aspect of the machine’s design was that its teenage disguise made it more likely that people would excuse its broken grammar and general silliness. Nevertheless, the strategy of misdirection comes across as transparent and superficial in conversations the chatbot had with skeptical journalists — so much so that one marvels not at the computer’s purported intelligence, but at the gullibility of the judges. Sadly, conquering the Turing Test has brought us no closer to solving AI's big problems.Last month, quantum computing achieved its own controversial milestone. This field aims to harness the laws of quantum mechanics to revolutionize computing. Classical computers rely on memory units called bits that encode either zero or one, so a state of the memory is a sequence of zeros and ones. Quantum computers, by contrast, use qubits, each of which encodes a “combination” of zero and one. In a quantum computer, multiple qubits interact, which means that each of the exponentially(1) many sequences of bits is represented simultaneously.The key question is whether this strange power can be exploited to perform computations that are beyond the reach of classical computers. Demonstrating even one such computation, however contrived, would lead to “quantum supremacy” — a term coined by physicist John Preskill of the California Institute of Technology in 2012. By this standard, Google appears to have achieved quantum supremacy. Specifically, the company said in October that its team used a 53-qubit quantum computer to generate random sequences of bits, which depend on controlled interactions between its qubits. By Google’s calculations it would take 10,000 years to carry out the same task using classical computation.(2) There is no doubt that controlling a 53-qubit quantum computer is a feat of science and engineering. As Preskill put it, “the recent achievement by the Google team bolsters our confidence that quantum computing is merely really, really hard,” rather than being “ridiculously hard.”As long as Google’s quantum computer works as intended, however, its dominance isn’t surprising — because the competition is rigged. It’s a bit like building a robotic hand that flips coins according to given parameters (such as, totally off the top of my head, the angle between the normal to the coin and the angular momentum vector), and then challenging a classical computer to generate sequences of heads and tails that obey the same laws of physics. This robot hand would perform astounding feats of coin-flipping but wouldn’t be able to do kindergarten arithmetic — and neither can Google’s quantum computer.It’s unclear, therefore, whether quantum supremacy is a meaningful milestone in the quest to build a useful quantum computer. To mention just one major obstacle (there are several), reliable quantum computing requires error correction. The catch is that quantum error correction protocols themselves demand fairly reliable qubits — and lots of them.In some ways, quantum supremacy is akin to iconic AI milestones like the Turing Test, or IBM’s chess victory over Gary Kasparov in 1997, which was also an engineering tour de force. These achievements demonstrate specialized capabilities and garner widespread attention, but their impact on the overarching goals of their respective fields may ultimately be limited.The danger is that excessive publicity creates inflated expectations of an imminent revolution in computing, despite measured commentary from experts. AI again provides historical precedent: The field has famously gone through several AI winters — decades in which talent fled and research funding ran dry — driven in large part by expectations that failed to materialize.Quantum computing research started three decades after AI, in the 1980s, and experienced a burst of excitement following the invention in 1994 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology mathematician Peter Shor of a quantum algorithm that would, in theory, crush modern cryptography. But eventually the dearth of, well, quantum computers caught up with quantum computing, and by 2005 the field was experiencing a massive downturn. The current quantum spring started only a few years ago; its signs include a surge of academic research as well as major investments by governments and tech giants like Alphabet Inc., International Business Machines Corp. and Intel Corp.Quantum computing and AI are two distinct fields — despite what whoever came up with the name Google AI Quantum would have you believe — and what is true for one isn't necessarily true for the other. But quantum computing can learn from AI's much longer career as an alternatively overhyped and underappreciated field. I am tempted to say that the chief lesson is “winter is coming,” but it is actually this: the pursuit of artificial milestones is a double-edged blade.(1) I am reminded of a mathematician’s plea to stop abusing the word “exponentially”; here I am using it in a way he would approve of.(2) The calculation was credibly disputed by IBM, but both companies agree that quantum computers are vastly more efficient than classical computers at this particular task.To contact the author of this story: Ariel Procaccia at arielpro@cs.cmu.eduTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Jonathan Landman at jlandman4@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Ariel Procaccia is an associate professor in the computer science department at Carnegie Mellon University. His areas of expertise include artificial intelligence, theoretical computer science and algorithmic game theory.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Jeremy Corbyn Wants to Nationalize the Internet
    Bloomberg

    Jeremy Corbyn Wants to Nationalize the Internet

    (Bloomberg Opinion) -- Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party is behind in the polls for the U.K. election so it’s unsurprising that he’s chucking out more giveaways to voters. The policy to nationalize BT Group Plc’s fixed-telecoms networks business and provide free fiber broadband to every British household is a humdinger nonetheless.Of course, the chances of this becoming reality are slim given that Corbyn’s best hope of becoming prime minister is a coalition with more moderate political parties. Yet the idea has stimulated even more debate than Labour’s previous plans to re-nationalize the railways and the energy utilities, so it’s at least worth thinking about. Taking it at face value, the policy would be a huge mistake that would achieve the opposite of its stated aim of accelerating Britain’s sluggish rollout of fiber broadband.First, there’s the cost. A Labour government would add 15 billion pounds ($19 billion) to an existing 5 billion pound broadband spending pot, according to Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell. Even assuming that would cover the required capital expenditure — a big assumption — it would cost at least the same again to nationalize Openreach, BT’s networks division.McDonnell says the state would pay for the acquisition by giving BT’s shareholders government bonds as compensation. Yet why would investors, especially those outside the U.K. protected by treaties against asset expropriation, exchange an 8.1% annual dividend yield from their BT stock for the less than 1% returns from U.K. gilts? The network spending itself would be funded by an increased tax on the likes of Facebook Inc., Alphabet Inc. and Amazon.com Inc. But the G-20 will probably adopt new international tax standards next year to try to curb Big Tech’s avoidance tactics. So a Labour government might not even be able to whomp up these levies without breaching the new guidelines.Then there’s the speed of rolling out the networks. While the U.K. is well behind the pace on high-speed broadband rollout (it’s 10th in the European Union’s 2019 connectivity rankings), a tortured nationalization process isn’t the answer. BT would have no incentive to keep investing during that period.The same’s true for private competitors such as John Malone’s Virgin Media, Vodafone Group Plc and Comcast Corp.’s Sky. Increased competition has at least accelerated the pace of the rollout: The proportion of homes with fiber access has doubled in two years.Infrastructure investors have also been attracted by the returns promised by fiber, prompting a flurry of investment from KKR & Co., Macquarie’s infrastructure fund and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. McDonnell’s comments have certainly caused some consternation. TalkTalk Telecom Group Plc. said it had paused talks to sell a fiber project, for which Goldman-backed CityFibre Ltd. was the lead bidder. Should Labour ever get the chance to offer free broadband to everyone through a state-owned provider, tens of thousands of private sector jobs would be jeopardized. How would other companies be able to compete?And full-fiber broadband might not even really be necessary. The adoption of next-generation 5G mobile networks promises the ability to transmit far more data at far greater speeds. That would make fiber to every home redundant in parts of the country.There are better and more thoughtful ways to get fiber installed sooner: Making it easier to get permits to build the network; permanently reducing business tax rates for new fiber; and making it obligatory for customers to accept fiber upgrades. If McDonnell is willing to hand over 15 billion pounds to BT shareholders to snap up Openreach, why not use the funds to subsidize the rollout directly?To contact the author of this story: Alex Webb at awebb25@bloomberg.netTo contact the editor responsible for this story: James Boxell at jboxell@bloomberg.netThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Alex Webb is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Europe's technology, media and communications industries. He previously covered Apple and other technology companies for Bloomberg News in San Francisco.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

  • U.K. Labour Plans to Nationalize BT’s Broadband Unit
    Bloomberg

    U.K. Labour Plans to Nationalize BT’s Broadband Unit

    (Bloomberg) -- Sign up to our Brexit Bulletin, follow us @Brexit and subscribe to our podcast.Britain’s Labour party pledged to offer all consumers free fiber broadband within a decade by nationalizing phone carrier BT Group Plc’s Openreach unit at a cost of 20 billion pounds ($26 billion).BT shareholders would get newly-issued government bonds in return for their shares, Labour’s shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, said in a speech in Lancaster, England on Friday. Shares of BT fell as much as 3.7%.It’s the biggest new pledge of the election campaign from Labour, which already has plans to nationalize the postal service, the railways and water and energy utilities. The broadband effort would be financed in part with taxes on multinational companies such as Amazon.com Inc., Facebook Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google. While the proposals may win over some voters, Labour may not be in a position to implement them. It has an average of 29% support in recent polls, trailing the Conservatives at 40%.“A Labour government will make broadband free for everybody,” party leader Jeremy Corbyn said at the campaign event at Lancaster University. “This is core infrastructure for the 21st century. It’s too important to be left to the corporations.”McDonnell said the new broadband pledge would be funded by asking “tech giants like Google and Facebook to pay a bit more” in proportion to their activities in the U.K. “So if a multinational has 10% of its sales, workforce, and operations in the U.K., they’re asked to pay tax on 10% of their global profits,” McDonnell said.While Labour puts the cost of the plan at about 20 billion pounds, BT’s Chief Executive Officer Philip Jansen said the proposal would cost almost five times that amount.BT shares were down 1.6% as of 12:29 p.m. in London, suggesting shareholders aren’t too worried about the nationalization risk. That gives the company a market value of about 19 billion pounds.“These are very very ambitious ideas,” Jansen said Friday in an interview on BBC Radio 4. “The Conservative Party have their own ambitious ideas for full fiber for everybody by 2025.”“How we do it is not straightforward, it needs funding,” Jansen said, putting the cost of such a roll-out over eight years at “not short of 100 billion pounds.”Lower Value?BT has been working to speed up its own full-fiber build and Jansen said the company’s shares have fallen on the recognition that “we’re going to be investing very very heavily.” Shareholders “are nursing massive losses on their investment” in BT if they’d bought it a few years ago, he said.Investors could get burned, as Openreach’s business would likely be undervalued in an expropriation, New Street analyst James Ratzer said in an email, adding that nationalization “rarely works well for shareholders.” Analysts at Jefferies put Openreach’s value at 13.5 billion pounds, flagging annual costs for operations and to service its high pension deficit.Labour’s McDonnell said the party has taken advice from lawyers to ensure its broadband plan fits within European Union state aid rules in case the U.K. is still in the bloc when the plans are carried out.Britain LaggingCorbyn’s plan is meant to solve a connectivity gap: Britain lags far behind other European nations when it comes to full-fiber coverage, which allows for gigabit-per-second download speeds. About 8% of the country is connected -- just under 2.5 million properties, according to a September report by communications regulator Ofcom. That compares with 63% for Spain and 86% for Portugal.As policymakers and regulators have been creating conditions to spur more competition with BT, rivals including Liberty Global Plc’s Virgin Media and Goldman Sachs Group Inc.-backed CityFibre have been jumping in to commit billions of pounds to infrastructure plans.“Those plans risk being shelved overnight,” Matthew Howett, an analyst at Assembly, said in an email. “This is a spectacularly bad take by the Labour Party.”The Labour announcement caused TalkTalk Telecom Group Plc to pause talks to sell a fiber project as the industry seeks clarity.Analysts are skeptical the government could roll out fiber more effectively than private industry and Howett pointed to delays and budget overruns from a state-led effort in Australia.It’s not the first time radical ideas have been proposed for BT’s Openreach unit, a national network of copper wire and fiber-optic cable that communication providers including BT, Comcast Corp.’s Sky and Vodafone Group Plc tap into to provide home internet to customers.BT was forced to legally separate the division from the rest of the company in recent years over concerns about competition, and that it wasn’t investing fast enough to roll out fiber, and some investors have suggested the company should fully spin it out into an independent, listed business to unlock value.‘Fantasy’ PlanNicky Morgan, the Conservative cabinet minister with responsibility for digital services, dismissed Corbyn’s plan in a statement as a “fantasy” that “would cost hardworking taxpayers tens of billions” of pounds.The Conservative Party’s own proposal for full-fiber broadband across the U.K. by 2025 -- eight years ahead of a previous government goal -- has raised eyebrows across the telecom industry, as some executives and analysts expressed skepticism about whether it’s doable, whether there’s consumer demand for the ultrafast internet service and how companies would make money.‘A Disaster’TechUK, the industry’s main trade body, called Labour’s plan “a disaster” for the telecom sector. “Renationalization would immediately halt the investment being driven not just by BT but the growing number of new and innovative companies that compete with BT,” said Chief Executive Officer Julian David.The announcement will provide more fodder for the arguments by Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s Conservatives that a Labour government risks plunging the country into an economic crisis. Chancellor of the Exchequer Sajid Javid over the weekend released analysis estimating Labour would raise spending by 1.2 trillion pounds over five years. McDonnell at the time called it “fake news.”McDonnell said Parliament would set the value of Openreach when it’s taken into public ownership and that shareholders would be compensated with government bonds.Under Labour’s plan, the roll-out would begin in areas with the worst broadband access, including rural communities, followed by towns and then by areas that are currently well-served by fast broadband.According to elections expert John Curtice, Corbyn’s chances of forming a majority government are “as close to zero” as it’s possible to get. The election is still hard to predict, and it is possible that Labour could yet win power, either on its own or with the support of smaller parties.(Updates with Corbyn remarks in fourth paragraph, McDonnell in fifth.)\--With assistance from Jennifer Ryan and Kit Rees.To contact the reporters on this story: Alex Morales in London at amorales2@bloomberg.net;Thomas Seal in London at tseal@bloomberg.netTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Rebecca Penty at rpenty@bloomberg.net, ;Tim Ross at tross54@bloomberg.net, Frank ConnellyFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.

  • Bull of the Day: Baidu Inc (BIDU)
    Zacks

    Bull of the Day: Baidu Inc (BIDU)

    Bull of the Day: Baidu Inc (BIDU)

  • Financial Times

    US Supreme Court takes up copyright case between Google and Oracle

    The US Supreme Court has agreed to take up a Google appeal in a long-running copyright case brought by Oracle that has cast a shadow over common development practices in the software world. Had the court refused Google’s appeal, the case would have been returned to a lower court for damages to be assessed, with Oracle seeking $9bn. The case turns on whether Google illegally copied code from Java, a software development framework owned by Oracle, when it created its Android mobile operating system.