Latest news with #AlphabetInc.
Los Angeles Times
22-07-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Google seeks licensing talks with news groups, following AI rivals
Google is seeking to recruit news organizations for a new licensing project related to artificial intelligence, according to people familiar with the matter, a sign the company wants to strengthen strained ties with the industry. The company plans to launch a pilot project initially with about 20 national news outlets, according to one of the people, who works at a media outlet that was contacted and asked not to be identified discussing private talks. 'We've said that we're exploring and experimenting with new types of partnerships and product experiences, but we aren't sharing details about specific plans or conversations at this time,' a Google spokesperson said in a statement. Getting Alphabet Inc.'s Google to pay for content for AI projects could be a big win for struggling media companies, which have lost readers and advertisers to digital outlets for years and view artificial intelligence as a new, potentially existential threat. With the exception of a partnership with the Associated Press earlier this year and a 2024 pact with Reddit, Google has mostly sat on the sidelines while AI rivals strike deals with publishers. Startups Perplexity AI Inc. and OpenAI have both started paying publishers to use their content in their chatbots, giving the media companies a much-needed infusion of revenue. Google's licensing project is tailored to specific products, according to another person familiar with the plan. They didn't share additional details of the program, such as possible terms. Google cites articles and online outlets in its AI Overviews, which are short, AI-generated responses that top many search results. While publishers believe those summaries have cut traffic to their websites, they have been hesitant to shield their content from Google's AI tools for fear of hurting their visibility in the company's search results. Silicon Valley and the media industry have been at odds over tech companies' use of news content to build AI programs, with publishers worried it will further erode their relationship with readers. In late 2023, the New York Times sued OpenAI, alleging that the startup and its largest investor, Microsoft Corp., relied on copyrighted articles to train the popular ChatGPT chatbot and other artificial intelligence features. Yet as the media industry increasingly speaks out about the need for compensation, technology companies seem to be recognizing they must come to terms with news outlets, said David Gehring, chief executive officer of Distributed Media Lab, a company that works with publishers and advertisers. Gehring said he had no knowledge of Google's latest talks with publishers. 'Google and the other platforms realize that — if not by virtue of public policy then by virtue of technology — the platforms' access to unlimited web data is about to end,' said Gehring, who previously worked on news partnerships at Google and the UK newspaper the Guardian. 'And so they need to have licensing relationships in place, or there won't be any blood to put in the veins of the AI monster.' In July, Cloudflare Inc., a web infrastructure and security company, announced a 'pay per crawl' program that lets creators bill AI services for access to their content. 'Google still thinks they're special and that they don't have to play by the same rules that the rest of the industry does,' Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince said in an interview. 'Eventually, Google will get in line with what the large AI companies have been saying for a long time, which is that ultimately content providers need to be paid for their content.' Google has long engaged in a delicate dance with news outlets. Many publishers depend on the search engine for traffic when news breaks. Yet industry leaders have cried foul about the tech giant's use of their content in products such as Google News, which displays headlines and short snippets of articles. In the past, Google has offered programs such as Google News Showcase to compensate publishers without undermining its core argument that the copyright doctrine of fair use permits use of their material. The company has also been more open to striking deals with wire services such as the AP, which are in the business of licensing content. Earlier this year, Google announced a partnership with the AP to provide news for its Gemini chatbot, its first deal of that nature. The tech giant has also explored an audio AI news product under its Gemini brand that leverages the content it's licensing from the AP, according to a person familiar with the matter. For the long-term health of the news business, Danielle Coffey, president of the News/Media Alliance trade group, said she is focused on ensuring the industry has 'a legally sustainable right to compensation and protections that will provide a fair market exchange for our valuable content across the board.' Love and Miller write for Bloomberg.
Yahoo
11-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Protecting Your Alphabet Position as Regulators Close In
Alphabet Inc. is the holding company of different business types, publicly listed as GOOG (class C shares, no voting rights) and GOOGL (class A shares with voting rights). In FY2024 the company generated $350 billion (bn) across four segments. Google Services is the biggest contributor to the total revenues ($ 304 bn) spread between: (i) subscriptions, platforms, and devices like Pixel phones ($ 40 bn - 11% of total); (ii) advertising makes up the biggest chunk of sales ($ 264.6 bn). Then comes the fastest growing segment of Cloud (or GCP - Google Cloud Platform) with $ 43 bn - 12% of total - as per FY2024. Minor contributions come from Hedging activities with $ 0.2 bn. The last revenue stream is perhaps the most fascinating yet less disclosed: Other bets, which generated more than $ 1.6 bn (or 0.5% of total sales) and includes promising businesses like autonomous driving venture Waymo, and life sciences business Verily. The position as one of the world's influential tech conglomerates costs Alphabet Inc. numerous, high-stakes legal battles to challenge its business practices and market power. The scope of the present writing is to shed some light on the direct and indirect impacts of these legal challenges and offer a strategy to play the short- to mid-term impact those may have, via options. The company discloses its legal battles into four types: (i) antitrust matters (the subject of this writing as it is the most substantial charges); (ii) privacy matters (e.g. for use of localization and biometric data); (iii) patent and intellectual property claims; (iv) other that are deemed less impactful (as litigation relating to Russia). For the antitrust matters, the table below summarizes the main litigations since 2017, divided by segment (i.e. Shopping, Android, AdTech, Search, Google Play, DMA), with the correlated timeline and monetary impact. In general, a case against GOOG can be estimated to last around 5 to 7 years. The average compounded in the table above accounts for just only one final judgment, while all the others are still in the judgment process ranging from 1 to 6 years. The only (recent) final verdict (EU vs. GOOG of Jun 2017) did cost the company $3.0 billion and 87 months in court. During those 7 years and 3 months, the Company managed to adapt to the likely post-sentence scenario and reported the amount of the plausible fine as an expense in its financials earlier before it was real. That is an example of correct reporting, with the application of the principle of prudence. Two are the most notable cases, both lasting since Q4 of 2020, hence a little more than four years. First, State AGs (U.S. - E.D. Texas) vs. GOOG started in December 2020, with trial scheduled for August 2025. Alphabet and Facebook (now META), named a co-conspirator, are accused of having harmed competition through unlawful agreements to rig ad auctions and to fix prices. Second, DoJ & State AGs (U.S. - D.C.) vs. GOOG started in October 2020, where District Judge Mehta found that Alphabet is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly. Remedies hearing ended in May 2025, and a final ruling expected by the end of August 2025. The DoJ has proposed several remedies, including the divestiture of Alphabet's Google Chrome web browser or restrictions on Alphabet's Android OS to prevent it from favouring its own search services. Alphabet already expressed its intention to appeal - yet it has to await a final verdict. Indeed, the stakes are quite high. Every case is on a standalone basis. It is not possible to make accurate predictions on such subjective matters. Yet history can be a guide. The landmark United States v. Microsoft (MSFT, Financial) case in the late 1990s accused Microsoft of illegally bundling its Internet Explorer browser with Windows to crush competition (i.e. Netscape). While the initial ruling ordered a breakup, this was ultimately overturned on appeal. Microsoft settled, and many argue this inadvertently paved the way for the rise of competitors like GOOGL. From the first legal investigation (1990) to the final resolution (2002), 13 years passed. Was it a lost decade for MSFT? Stock performance can be used as a proxy of investor and fact appraisal. From 1990 to 2002 the price return was +4,500%. What followed 2002 though, was the lost decade for MSFT, a null price return for almost a decade. The subsequent stock performance, nonetheless, has been astonishing, +1,800% since 2012 (a CAGR north of 25%/year). Several reasons can be found for that, yet possible takeaways are: (i) that historical precedent will be dissected by both parties in the US vs. Alphabet case and rightly so, (ii) courts in the first sentences tend to overestimate the remedies perhaps as a bargaining lever, and (iii) legal actions are expected to last between 5 to 10 years. Lastly, (iv) given the rapidly changing environment of the tech in question, investors should focus their reasoning/best judgment on whether the plaintiff's theory will remain the same in the coming years or if the scenario could change. Search business has been pivotal in Alphabet's ascent, is crucial at the moment but will it lower its impact? Will competitors rise in this space? If that is the case, will Alphabet adapt to find new profitable business streams (e.g. cloud services, cybersecurity, autonomous driving)? Another historic case is US v. AT&T which was settled in 1982 and began around 8 yearsearlier. The result was drastic: the breakup of the telecommunications giant into seven regional "Baby Bells. That spurred significant competition in the long-distance market, but the investor ended up with a 14% yearly CAGR (from 1983 to 2002 vs. 11.2% by the S&P500). And several pundits argued that the ruling led to weakening the US from a national security point of view, as the current infrastructure is more and more dependent on foreign suppliers and operators. Is this a desirable outcome for the current Administration? Can that be a winning argument for the Alphabet case as well? Here are briefly presented news and a comment regarding the upcoming august trials. (i) Regarding the Texas judge that found Alphabet and Meta (then Facebook) to be co-conspirator in the ad tech space, Alphabet asked the judge to postpone the case by 60-days. That will allow for a similar case brought by the DoJ to be discussed starting Sept 22. (ii) The most compelling verdict is expected by the end of August. This is the DoJ case in which Alphabet has been found to be a monopolist in the search space. Judge Mehta at closing arguments in May 2025, outlined three types of remedies: inductive remedies, forward-looking remedies, structural remedies. Injunctive remedies would be behavioral hence less harmful to top and bottom line (e.g. stop paying to be default search on Apple's devices). Similarly it goes for forward-looking remedies that could require to share data with competitors. There may be several ways in which this could harm Alphabet yet it could be easier for them to comply with that request while protecting their hedge. Last, but not at all least, is the asked spin off of Google Chrome. Perplexity and OpenAI have shown interests to bid for the future company. Alphabet can obviously be damaged by that in a big way. My view is that value can be generated even from a spin off since the company is worth around 20% more on a sum of the parts basis than as an aggregate. Nonetheless this last option is the least probable, indeed Judge Mehta said: We're not looking to kneecap Google. A loss in an antitrust case generally comes with three consequences: (i) remedies that force changes to the business structure/operations; (ii) financial sanctions; (iii) reputational damage. Let's analyze the last two items, given that remedies are unique for every case. Financial sanctions frequently arise from antitrust cases. During these circumstances, Alphabet adopts its better judgment to estimate the most likely numerical cost and then account for that in the financial statements. Legal fees are expensed in the period they occurred, while fines are recorded both in the balance sheets and cash flow statement (under accrued expenses and other current liabilities). The number is recorded even if the trial is under appeal. Given the time elapsed from the first injunction to the final decision of legal actions, GOOG can de facto use the capital to mitigate the direct financial impact of the fines. On a theoretical, yet elegant, ground, capital has the possibility to double or quadruple over the period the court has reached the final ruling. Alphabet has an exceptional ability to generate high returns on invested capital and total capital (ROIC and ROTC). Historically, those figures ranged from 20% to 30%. Assuming an average length of trial of 7 years, that would mean doubling the capital once (at a rate of 10%), twice at 20%, and thrice at 30% - using the simple heuristic Rule of 72. This, of course, doesn't mean the economic damage is zero. A different story must be told about reputation. The label of monopoly or anti-competitive business could generate substantial damage. The main detrimental effect could be on lasting mistrust on new generations, leading to lower business appeal and hence hardship in attracting talent. Meta (formerly Facebook) undertook a major rebranding in part to offset the controversies around the social media scandals of the 2015-2018 with the Cambridge Analytica data misuse. Since 2021, Facebook is part of a revised parent company named Meta Platforms (riding the hype of the moment, with the metaverse enthusiasm). What will happen if Alphabet has to spin off Chrome is anyone's guess. The moat they are enjoying at the moment is very high, think of user inertia, Googling is synonymous with searching. Nonetheless, the AI revolution is here even in the LLMs everyone is experiencing right now. A growing number of research projects are being done on ChatGPT for fashion, ease of use, and quickness of responses in an increasingly dynamic world. A divestiture order may come late and have to confront the new reality that could be a shift in searching happening directly on LLMs like ChatGPT or Google's Gemini. The transfer of trust in Google (hence its moat) to Gemini could come faster than expected. As a bonus, Alphabet is testing advertisements on its AI tool Gemini. Hard data on conversion and profitability of this (potentially) game-changer move is still absent, yet the management team has expressed very positive sentiment - only subjective data though. A possible risk here is a massive data breach. If that come, Alphabet would lose a bit of traction in adoption of its ecosystem. Speaking of which, Alphabet has several other growing businesses. The present paragraph is not intended to be complete, but to ignite meditation. Search and other accounts for 65% of total sales. Let's also include Google Network that is basically the revenues made to show ads on apps and sites not owned by Alphabet, bringing the total to 75%. The remaining quarter comes from Cloud (14%, growing at an annual rate of more than 30% with increasing margins), YouTube Ads (12%), and Other Bets (0.5%). YouTube Ads generated $36 bn in the last fiscal year - 23% CAGR over the last 10 years. Netflix (NFTLX) generated $39 bn - 21% CAGR over the same period. NFLX's $479 bn market cap implies a P/S of 11, higher than the decennial average of 8.2. At these multiples - perhaps a bit magnified - YouTube would be valued between $ 295 bn and $ 396 bn. That's just 12% of sales of Alphabet. Then there is the Other bets segment that includes several ventures like Waymo, Verily, AlphaFold (protein folding prediction model), and some VC investments made decades ago like SpaceX. Specifically, this one does not appear in any public filing, yet a significant purchase was done around 2015 for a stake of approximately 10% (shared with Fidelity investment). Overall, the capital allocation of the Alphabet management team has been solid, with the benefit of a long-term horizon rested on the tranquillity of having a near-automatic cash-flow positive machine. They recognized the risk of concentration in advance and actively pursued diversification. The last move in this direction is the agreement to acquire Wiz, the cybersecurity firm. An hyper-online world like ours will probably need more online security; it is one of the next waves. On September 22, 2025 a remedies process is scheduled to start. Given the fact that a date has been set, options can be useful. As a reminder you can either use American or European style options depending on the preference of having the flexibility to exercise on any day before expiration or just at expiration date. The option price is a function of several factors, in particular time and volatility plays a key role. For the purpose of the strategy these are the most important aspects. 30-day Implied volatility (IV30) on GOOG is trending lower thanks to subsequent recent positive movements in the stock price in recent days. At 26.5 the IV30 is around the 40% percentile rank, -8.9% below its 20 day moving average of 29.1 . Lower volatility means lower expected price swings, hence lower option prices. Considering the fact that every news related to the upcoming September trial is expected to be perceived as bad by the market, an investor may want to buy a long put with a bit of time cushion, let's say 3 weeks, hence mid October. This strategy will enable the buyer to either (i) hedge a direct equity exposure on the underlying stock, (ii) speculate on the downside movements. Let's take for example an out-of-the-money long put expiring on Oct 17, 2025 with a strike price of $160 (GOOG251017P00160). The cost (option premium) is $8.55 at the time of writing, making the breakeven point around $151.45, perhaps a bit lower when accounting for transaction costs varying from broker to broker. Let's assume the case (i) of direct equity exposure to say 100 shares. This means that the buyer is paying a 5.11% insurance premium on the current stock price ($167.43) to cap its losses. In particular, gains over the current stock price are lowered by the same factor of 5.11% (e.g. a stock price of $217, meaning a +30% from today's value would result in a +24.89% net performance - red line and red bars in the charts below). Yet, notably, losses are capped. The amount would result in a maximum loss of -9.54% (as displayed in the charts below, with the blue line and the blue bars). An investor could also play the uncertainty even via an option-only strategy (ii). Buy the long put option with a fraction of the cost of the total exposure to the underlying (i.e. with only 5.11% of the total capital), saving the remaining 94.89% to fund future acquisition in case the price will tank and hence buying at a discount. Notably both strategies involve time risk. Options are not perpetual and expire worthless after the expiration date, making it sensible to possible delay in trail beginning and other unforeseen events. The same strategy could consider also the final verdict on a sterpate legal case expected at the end of August, not deeply explored in the present article for the sake of readability. The main rationale to this strategy is to try to moderate short-term price drop due to downside scenarios. In particular judges can force Alphabet to share data gathered via Google Search which could lead to margin compression in its very profitable ad-tech segment. Alphabet is facing significant headwinds with the antitrust challenges. Its Search and AdTech businesses are under attack, being sentenced as monopolies. Some restructuring can be due. Nonetheless, given the generally long court time and good capital allocation management, the company could absorb direct financial impact even on substantial fines. The greatest risks lie in likely forced divestitures that could come with reputational erosion. That said, Alphabet is not stagnant. Strategic moves made in the past could soon start yielding their results (e.g. Waymo, AlphaFold, SpaceX). The recent significant commitment to cybersecurity, with the Wiz acquisition proposal, could prove a winning path for future growth. An investor can position its capital to profit from upcoming uncertainty using long put options. Indeed those derivatives are priced favorably given the recent low volatility observed in the stock price. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.
Yahoo
10-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Google's Gemini AI App Can Now Turn Photos Into Short Video Clips
(Bloomberg) -- Alphabet Inc.'s Google is adding the ability for paid users of its Gemini artificial intelligence assistant to turn their photos into short video clips, expanding access to a tool the tech giant launched earlier this year to a more limited audience. Singer Akon's Failed Futuristic City in Senegal Ends Up a $1 Billion Resort Are Tourists Ruining Europe? How Locals Are Pushing Back Can Americans Just Stop Building New Highways? Why Did Cars Get So Hard to See Out Of? Denver City Hall Takes a Page From NASA People who subscribe to Google AI Ultra and Pro plans in select regions will be able to use the feature through the web version of Gemini starting Thursday, the company said in a statement. The tool will be rolled out on the Gemini mobile app throughout the week. The new feature lets users create 8-second clips with sound based on a photo, as well as any text description of the scene they include in the prompt field. The videos will be created as an MP4 file at 720p resolution in a 16:9 landscape format, the company said. The update makes the powerful feature accessible via Gemini's chat interface, helping Google keep pace with US rivals like OpenAI and Runway AI Inc., a startup specializing in AI-generated video. It faces fierce global competition in this space, too: China's Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., AI startup Manus and Kuaishou Technology have all released new or updated video tools over the past few months. Google's photo-to-video feature is powered by Veo 3, the company's latest video generation model announced in May at its annual developer conference. Veo 3 has been available to users through a standalone paid filmmaking tool called Flow. Google says it has taken 'significant steps behind the scenes to make sure video generation is an appropriate experience.' For example, it doesn't allow video creation with images of publicly identifiable figures, such as celebrities, presidents or even some well-known CEOs. Its policy also prohibits outputs that encourage dangerous activities or incite violence or bullying against individuals or groups. But it has its drawbacks. When Bloomberg News tested the feature on the web version of Gemini, uploading personal photos and asking the tool to generate a video of a person talking, the output changed the facial features, and sometimes even the race, of the subject in multiple instances. While it was able to successfully respond to prompts to create videos of plants moving in the wind or a talking cat based on still images, it wasn't able to follow more complicated prompts, such as making a person in a photo breakdance. It instead created a video of the person waving to the camera. There is no instruction in the AI model to change a person's appearance, a Google spokesman said in response to Bloomberg's test results. The photo-to-video generation and face animation features are still a new technology and may build upon a single image in ways that aren't representative of the original image, he added. The model is better at bringing other scenes to life, such as animating everyday objects, drawings and paintings, and adding movement to nature photos, he said. The company will continue improving the model, including face animation, in future updates. --With assistance from Davey Alba. Will Trade War Make South India the Next Manufacturing Hub? 'Our Goal Is to Get Their Money': Inside a Firm Charged With Scamming Writers for Millions Trump's Cuts Are Making Federal Data Disappear 'Telecom Is the New Tequila': Behind the Celebrity Wireless Boom SNAP Cuts in Big Tax Bill Will Hit a Lot of Trump Voters Too ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Time of India
03-07-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Google ends recipe pilot that left creators fearing web-traffic hit
HighlightsGoogle has terminated its trial of the Recipe Quick View feature, which allowed users to view cooking-recipe content directly in search results, following concerns from food bloggers about potential loss of traffic and ad revenue. The decision to end the feature reflects ongoing discussions about the relationship between search engines like Google and content creators, particularly in the context of generative artificial intelligence transforming online content consumption. Creators expressed relief at Google's decision, with some noting that it signifies a positive recognition of creator feedback, while also acknowledging that Google's experimentation with recipe content is likely to continue. Google has ended tests of a feature that would have let users open a snapshot of cooking-recipe content directly in web search results — a welcome development for creators and food bloggers who were concerned about eroding traffic to their sites. In recent months, Alphabet Inc.-owned Google has tested Recipe Quick View , which showed some food bloggers' content in search. The company framed the feature as an attempt to help users determine whether they are interested in a recipe before visiting a website. But some bloggers said they feared that the product would keep users from clicking through to their sites, depriving them of traffic and ad revenue. Google on Tuesday confirmed it ended the trial. 'We continually experiment with ways to make it easier for people to find helpful information on Search,' a spokesperson for Google said in a statement. 'Learnings from these experiments help to inform future development and efforts.' The company's retreat on the recipe feature comes amid a larger debate about whether the terms of engagement between the search giant and publishers should be renegotiated as generative AI remakes the web. Creators who depend on Google and other technology companies for traffic have spoken out about the devastating toll AI has taken on their businesses, and are pushing for more control over how their content is used to develop the technology. Cloudflare Inc., a web infrastructure and security company, on Tuesday announced a 'pay per crawl' program that allows creators to bill AI services for access to their content. 'We have this ongoing standards conversation of how might a site say, 'I want you to do search but not generative AI training,'' said Derek Slater, co-founder of Proteus Strategies, a tech policy consulting firm. 'Those are moving technological and market-driven pieces that have not settled yet.' Creators who participated in the pilot with Google were being directly compensated, but not nearly enough to offset declines in their advertising revenue, Marc McCollum, chief growth officer at Raptive, told Bloomberg earlier this year. Raptive, a media company that represents creators, estimated that traffic to food blogs would fall by half if the feature were implemented in full. Soon after news of the test program surfaced, creators made their concerns known, said Tomiko Harvey, a travel and food blogger at Passports and Grub, who attended a Google creator summit in May. 'I'm actually feeling hopeful about this decision from Google,' Harvey wrote in an email. 'Canceling the Quick View Recipe feature feels like a rare but welcome acknowledgment that creator feedback matters.' Although Google's decision has some creators feeling relief, they likely haven't seen the last of the search giant's experimentation in a vibrant corner of the web. In recent years, many food bloggers have padded their recipes with lengthy preambles to ensure their content ranks well in Google Search, irritating readers in the process. As it crawls the web, Google will glean information about recipes' core principles — say, the basic proportions of broth and meat in a recipe for chicken noodle soup — which it can then use to inform its own answers, Slater said. 'Recipes are, by definition, facts, and facts are not copyrightable,' Slater said. For Google, 'there's always going to be a tension between giving the user exactly what they want,' he added, 'and directing the user to another site.'
Mint
25-06-2025
- Business
- Mint
Gemini CLI debuts as Google's open-source AI coding assistant: How it works
Alphabet Inc.'s Google has unveiled a new artificial intelligence-powered coding assistant called Gemini CLI (Command Line Interface), designed to streamline the development process by allowing users to interact with their systems through natural language. The global launch signals Google's intent to close the gap with competing AI tools such as OpenAI's Codex and Anthropic's Claude Code. Announced on Wednesday, Gemini CLI is positioned as an open-source tool that brings the capabilities of Google's Gemini AI directly to the terminal, the text-based interface widely used by developers. It enables users to perform a variety of tasks using conversational commands, ranging from writing and debugging code to building simple websites or even generating videos. "With Gemini CLI, you can have a natural language conversation with your computer to solve problems and weave complex workflows together, to do far more than was previously possible," said Taylor Mullen, Senior Staff Software Engineer at Google, during a press briefing. One of the defining features of Gemini CLI is its open-source nature. Google said the decision reflects a broader goal of democratising access to AI tools, enabling developers to inspect, adapt, and contribute to the codebase. This move also supports transparency, allowing users to understand the mechanics of the tool and assess its security. Gemini CLI builds on Google's existing legacy of open AI development, including the TensorFlow engine and several foundational transformer models, the architecture behind leading AI systems like ChatGPT. The launch of Gemini CLI also follows Google's recent release of Gemma, its open large language models made publicly available earlier in 2024. These efforts point to a shift in strategy, with the tech giant increasingly engaging with external developers after years of keeping much of its proprietary AI under wraps. Gemini CLI users with personal Google accounts will be granted a free Gemini Code Assist licence, offering access to the Gemini 2.5 Pro model. This tier includes a generous usage limit of up to 60 requests per minute and 1,000 per day. Paid plans expand those limits to 120 requests per minute and 1,500 per day, while enterprise users can make up to 2,000 requests daily. Ryan J. Salva, Senior Director of Product at Google, emphasised the broad applicability of the new tool: 'We believe that these tools are going to dominate the way not just developers, but creators of all kinds, work over the next decade. Whether you're a student, a freelancer, or a seasoned professional, you deserve access to the same cutting-edge resources.'
