The companies have reached out to regulators in the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom and China, with concerns that Nvidia could change how Arm licenses its chipmaking technology.
Nvidia pledged that it would not use its control over the company to change how it interacts with other business activities.
Nvidia CEO, (Jensen Huang) Jensen Huang, said at Message To the Financial Times: It can unequivocally state that Nvidia will maintain the open Arm licensing model, and we have no intention of strangling or refusing to supply the Arm to any customer.
Nvidia’s competitors argue that keeping the Arm neutral and not using its technology to gain Nvidia is inconsistent with its $ 40 billion acquisition.
Licensing restrictions may harm companies that benefit from having the ability to license Arm technology.
It is said: Google and Microsoft are working on their own Arm-based chips, while Qualcomm processors are based on the architecture.
Nvidia argued that the acquisition is about pushing AI forward, an area that Nvidia has focused heavily on, from scaling up machine learning with its graphics cards to its work in self-driving cars.
Its low-power Arm technology can help Nvidia spread AI to more places, but it has to figure out what to do with other Arm businesses, especially mobile and laptop chips.
Regulators also appear to be looking closely at the deal to determine whether it gives Nvidia a lot of chipmaking power.
The Federal Trade Commission asked Nvidia and Arm to provide more information, and could speak to other companies that may have relevant information.
Meanwhile, UK and EU officials promised to thoroughly investigate the deal.
And it is very likely that they will hear many objections, not only from Google, Microsoft and Qualcomm, but from others in the chip industry who are concerned about the impact of an open license agreement with Arm with the merger.
These firms have experience with regulators and anti-competitive behavior.
Qualcomm has had to pay fines in the hundreds of millions and sometimes billions of dollars to authorities in China, South Korea and the European Union due to its anti-competitive licensing policies.
Microsoft had a big monopoly case in the 1990s, as it pushed against the United States government.
Recently, Google has been the focus of growing antitrust sentiment in the United States and the European Union.