The US Department of Justice has secured a significant victory in its antitrust lawsuit against Google, which alleged that the tech giant maintains a monopoly within the advertising technology sector. The ruling follows Google’s earlier defeat in a related antitrust case concerning its search practices, stating that the company’s anticompetitive actions have notably “harmed” both publishers and internet users.
In her decision, US District Judge Leonie Brinkema noted, “Plaintiffs have proven that Google has engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts to acquire and maintain monopoly power in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets for open-web display advertising.” She emphasized that for over ten years, Google has linked its publisher ad server and ad exchange through a combination of contractual agreements and technological integration, which has allowed it to consolidate its dominance in these markets.
Judge Brinkema determined that Google’s actions rendered it “liable under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act” regarding its operations in the ad tech landscape. However, she dismissed claims of monopoly in ad networks.
Responding to the ruling, Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, stated, “We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half.” She highlighted that the court recognized the competitive nature of their advertiser tools and acquisitions like DoubleClick. “We disagree with the Court’s decision concerning our publisher tools. Publishers have numerous options and they select Google because our ad tech solutions are straightforward, cost-effective, and efficient,” she added.
In a similar vein to Judge Amit Mehta’s prior ruling in the search case, Judge Brinkema cautioned Google for not preserving internal communications, referencing a messaging application that “deleted records of chats between employees.” While she indicated this issue could warrant sanctions, the judge opted not to impose any in this case, as her decision relied on available testimony and accepted evidence.
During the three-week trial, the DOJ contended that Google had unlawfully monopolized three distinct markets within the ad tech industry: tools for publishers, ad networks for advertisers, and the ad exchanges that facilitate transactions. They argued that Google’s integration of its publisher ad server and ad exchange constituted a breach of antitrust laws. The government claimed that these practices allow Google to reap monopoly profits at the expense of publishers and advertisers, diminishing their experiences without viable alternatives.
Google countered by arguing that the government’s perspective on the market lacks foundation. They maintained that their tools support both publishers and advertisers in generating revenue, and emphasized that the integration of their various tools enhances effectiveness for consumers. Google asserted that its business practices are legitimate and that the government is attempting to dictate operational guidelines.
This ruling comes at a time when Google and the DOJ are preparing for the remedies stage of another federal case in DC regarding search practices. The DOJ has suggested significant changes, including potentially divesting Google’s Chrome browser and requiring enhanced transparency in search results distribution.
