Microsoft’s $69B deal to buy Activision can go forward: judge
Microsoft has won a significant legal victory in its planned acquisition of Activision Blizzard, a leading video game maker. On Tuesday, a US judge ruled that Microsoft can proceed with its $69 billion deal, dismissing the request from antitrust enforcers for a preliminary injunction to temporarily halt the acquisition.
The court has, however, extended its temporary restraining order until Friday at 11:59 pm to allow the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) an opportunity to appeal the decision. The FTC had initially asked the judge to block the deal, arguing that it would give Microsoft exclusive access to Activision games such as the popular “Call of Duty.” The concern was that this exclusivity would limit the availability of these games on other platforms.
Activision Blizzard CEO, Bobby Kotick, expressed confidence in the benefits of the merger, stating that it would benefit consumers and workers and foster healthy competition in the rapidly growing gaming industry. Microsoft President Brad Smith took to Twitter to express his gratitude for the court’s decision, describing it as “quick and thorough.”
This ruling marks a significant milestone for Microsoft as it seeks to expand its influence in the gaming industry. The acquisition of Activision Blizzard would solidify its position as a major player in the gaming world and grant it access to a wealth of popular franchises and intellectual properties.
—
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs):
Q: What did the US judge rule regarding the Microsoft and Activision Blizzard deal?
A: The judge ruled that Microsoft may go forward with its planned acquisition of Activision Blizzard and rejected the request for a preliminary injunction to temporarily halt the deal.
Q: Why did the Federal Trade Commission want to stop the acquisition?
A: The FTC argued that the deal would give Microsoft exclusive access to Activision games, potentially limiting their availability on other gaming platforms.
Q: What are the potential benefits of the merger, according to Activision Blizzard?
A: Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick believes the merger will benefit consumers and workers and foster healthy competition in the gaming industry.
Q: How did Microsoft respond to the judge’s decision?
A: Microsoft President Brad Smith expressed gratitude for the court’s decision, describing it as quick and thorough.
Q: What would the acquisition mean for Microsoft?
A: The acquisition of Activision Blizzard would solidify Microsoft’s position as a major player in the gaming industry and provide access to popular franchises and intellectual properties.
Judge allows Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision worth $69 billion to proceed
Microsoft has been given the green light by a US judge to proceed with its $69 billion acquisition of popular videogame manufacturer Activision Blizzard. In a blow to antitrust enforcers, the judge rejected their request for a preliminary injunction, allowing the deal to move forward. However, the court granted an extension of its temporary restraining order until Friday at 11:59 pm to give the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) an opportunity to appeal the decision.
The FTC had originally urged the judge to halt the proposed acquisition, citing concerns that it would grant Microsoft, the creator of the Xbox gaming console, exclusive access to Activision games such as the highly successful “Call of Duty.” The agency’s main worry was that this could limit the availability of these popular videogames on other platforms.
In response, Bobby Kotick, CEO of Activision Blizzard, expressed optimism about the merger, stating, “Our merger will benefit consumers and workers. It will enable competition rather than allow entrenched market leaders to continue to dominate our rapidly growing industry.” Meanwhile, Microsoft President Brad Smith took to Twitter to express gratitude for the judge’s decision, describing it as “quick and thorough.”
As the legal battle continues, coverage of this significant decision will undoubtedly focus on the implications for the video game industry and the potential consequences for both consumers and workers.