360 ONE Asset on Thursday said it acquired a stake in OneSource Specialty Pharma, a contract development and manufacturing organisation (CDMO) specialising in biologics, complex injectables, and drug-device combinations.

In a statement, the company said the deal involves buying out an existing investor’s stake.

OneSource is among a handful of Indian CDMOs equipped to develop and manufacture cutting-edge products like GLP-1 drugs, which use a compound similar to those present in the popular obesity and diabetes drug, Ozempic. It also produces novel biologics or medicines derived from living organisms.

Backed by five highly automated manufacturing plants—four of which hold US-FDA approval—the company boasts a team of over 1,200 employees, including more than 100 scientists and technical experts.

“OneSource has established itself as a trusted development and manufacturing partner for top pharmaceutical companies worldwide,” said Neeraj Sharma, CEO of OneSource Specialty Pharma. “Our expertise in niche and complex dosage forms, along with our track record of superior compliance, allows us to provide an integrated, one-stop solution to our global clients. We are glad to welcome 360 ONE Asset as an investor who aligns with our mission to scale further,” he added.

OneSource was formed after the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) approved the merger of Strides Pharma Science, Steriscience Specialties Pvt Ltd, and the high-end biologics operations previously under Stelis Biopharma.

At the time, Strides Pharma Science said the collaboration was supported by a fresh equity infusion of Rs 801 crore (about $95 million) from a consortium of well-known investors. The investment valued the company at a pre-money equity valuation of $1.65 billion.

“We are delighted to back OneSource and its stellar team that has built a wide portfolio of capabilities. The company’s leadership in large molecules, complex injectables, and drug-device combinations positions it perfectly for the next phase of growth. We look forward to collaborating with OneSource as they continue their journey of innovation and global expansion,” Tarun Sharma, Fund Manager (Healthcare and Consumer) at 360 ONE Asset, said.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is taking a historic step in antitrust enforcement that could reshape the tech landscape. Recent reports suggest the DOJ aims to force Google to divest Chrome, its immensely popular web browser, to address concerns about its dominance in online search and advertising. With this move, the DOJ hopes to untangle Google’s sprawling digital empire, but will it truly lead to a fairer internet, or is this a Pandora’s box of unintended consequences?

Let’s unpack the details, the implications, and the monumental challenges of dismantling a tech titan.

Google Chrome: The Crown Jewel of Browsers

As of October 2024, Google Chrome commands a staggering 65.25% share of the global desktop browser market and 68.04% of the mobile browser market. These numbers illustrate Chrome’s omnipresence—it has been the gateway to the internet for billions of years. Its market dominance isn’t just about user preference but also about how Google integrates Chrome into its broader ecosystem, offering a seamless experience tied to its search engine, Gmail, YouTube, and other services.

Google’s browser has long been the backbone of its data-collection and advertising strategies, which contribute over 80% of Alphabet’s $300 billion annual revenue. Chrome users feed into this cycle by generating behavioral data, which Google uses to refine its advertising algorithms and improve its other platforms. This interconnectedness has fueled Google’s success but also drawn the ire of regulators.

The DOJ’s Allegations and Remedies

The DOJ accuses Google of leveraging its control over Chrome and its search engine to stifle competition and maintain an illegal monopoly. To address these issues, the DOJ has outlined several remedies:

Divesting Chrome

Forcing Google to sell Chrome would strike at the heart of its ecosystem. Without Chrome, Google’s ability to collect browser data and optimize its advertising algorithms could be significantly diminished.

Restricting Default Search Engine Agreements

Google reportedly spends $20 billion annually—more than NASA’s annual budget—to secure default search engine status on browsers like Apple’s Safari. The DOJ aims to curb such practices, creating space for competitors like Bing, DuckDuckGo, and Brave.

Mandating Data Sharing

By requiring Google to share search data with competitors, the DOJ hopes to level the playing field. This could empower smaller players to refine their search algorithms and attract more users.

Decoupling Android

The DOJ also proposes separating Android from Google’s suite of services, such as Maps and Gmail. This would allow phone manufacturers more freedom to offer alternative services.

Regulating AI Usage

Google’s dominance extends to AI, where it uses Chrome data to refine machine learning models. Limiting how this data is used could weaken Google’s AI capabilities and empower other players in the space.

Giving Websites More Control

Google’s use of web content in its AI systems has also raised concerns. The DOJ suggests giving publishers more say in how their content is used.

Who Could Buy Chrome?

If Chrome were sold, finding a buyer with the resources and expertise to manage such a massive platform would be challenging. Possible candidates include:

• OpenAI: Backed by Microsoft, OpenAI has the technical expertise and financial backing to make the acquisition work. However, Microsoft’s involvement could raise further antitrust concerns.
• Private Equity Firms: Deep-pocketed investment groups might see Chrome as a lucrative opportunity, but their lack of experience in managing large-scale tech platforms could be a drawback.

Whoever takes the reins of Chrome would face significant hurdles, particularly in monetizing the browser without access to Google’s advertising infrastructure.

Potential Impacts on the Internet

The DOJ’s proposals aim to foster competition, but they could also disrupt the internet ecosystem in profound ways:

Innovation and Competition

Breaking up Google could vitalize competition, leading to new innovations in browsers and search engines. Smaller players might finally get their chance to shine.

User Experience

A Chrome-less Google might struggle to maintain the seamless integration that users have come to expect. This could result in fragmented services and a less cohesive internet experience.

Cost Implications

Google’s free services are supported by its advertising revenue. Without the data synergy provided by Chrome, Google might have to charge for services like Gmail and Drive, fundamentally altering the internet’s economic model.

Privacy and Data Handling

Post-divestiture, Chrome’s new owner would need to establish clear data policies. This transition could lead to privacy concerns or opportunities for better data practices.

A Global Ripple Effect

The DOJ’s actions are likely to set a precedent for tech regulation worldwide. The European Union is already investigating Google’s practices, and other nations could follow suit. If successful, the case could redefine how countries approach antitrust issues in the tech industry.

Google’s Defense and Adaptation

Google has labeled the DOJ’s proposals as a “radical agenda” and is mounting a strong legal defense. The company argues that such measures would stifle innovation and harm consumers. Simultaneously, Google is preparing for a post-cookie future, finding ways to collect user data without third-party cookies—a clear sign that it is bracing for change.

The Bigger Picture

At its core, this case isn’t just about Google or Chrome—it’s about the future of the internet. If the DOJ succeeds, we could see a fairer digital landscape with more competition and stricter data regulations. However, the transition could also bring higher costs for users, disrupted services, and a less unified online experience.

As court hearings unfold in 2025, one thing is certain: this is a turning point for technology, business, and society. Whether this leads to a brighter, more competitive internet or unintended chaos remains to be seen.

For now, we’re left wondering: is this truly the end of Google Chrome, or just the beginning of a new chapter in the tech world?

Bitkey, the self-custody crypto wallet from Block Inc, founded by Jack Dorsey, has launched an inheritance feature on its platform to enhance control and privacy for its users.

The feature is set to roll out in December and launched widely in January 2025.

Bitkey hopes to disrupt the current landscape with the new offering that enables people who hold keys to their Bitcoin to have full control of their money. The company said that its inheritance ensures that the funds being held in a Bitkey wallet are transferred to a designated beneficiary after the passing of the owner.

“With this inheritance solution, we are offering customers a safe and simple way for them to pass their assets onto the next generation,” said Jason Karsh, Business Lead for Bitkey, in a statement. “Bitcoin is a multi-generational asset, and we think Bitkey should be multi-generational, too. We designed inheritance to be simple for beneficiaries to transfer, access, and manage their inheritance when the time comes.”

Bitkey’s inheritance feature will be initially clubbed with the purchase of Bitkey hardware devices. To set up the feature, the owner can invite a beneficiary through the Bitkey app. Once accepted, the inheritance plan will be created.

The company also added that to protect against any fraudulent claim, it has put in a six-month waiting period that must be completed before a beneficiary can access these funds.

Introduced by US-based Block, Bitkey is a self-custody Bitcoin wallet that can be accessed through a mobile app, a hardware device, and a set of recovery tools.

In 2023, the company entered the Indian market with Bitkey.