The federal judge said today that Google is a monopolist in some parts of the online advertising market, which means the second case in the year in which it was found that the company violated American antitrust law. In August last year, the federal judge ruled that Google was maintaining an illegal monopoly in search.
Judge Leon Brinka from the American District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia He determined that Google illegally monopolized parts of his advertising technology To dominate the program program, the main source of revenues for the company. Google generated almost $ 30.4 billion last year for global advertising revenues in other applications and websites. Now a significant part of the sale is threatened with penalties that may take place after Brinem’s judgment. The best scenario for American consumers is to browse the full number of ads and withdrawals and more content choices.
“In addition to depriving rivals of the ability to compete, [Google’s] The exclusive behavior essentially harmed the clients of the Google publisher, a competitive process, and ultimately consumers of information about the open network – wrote Brinkma.
It was found that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act, the Cornerstone antitrust law in the USA, “by intentional acquisition and maintenance of monopolistic power on the market of advertising servers of the Open Web publishing house and the stock market market for displaying advertising and unlawfully combined its publisher’s advertising server (DFP) and exchange of advertising (ADX).” In other words, the way Google combined parts of his advertising technology was considered unlawful.
Online ads end in front of consumers after passing through the chain of systems connecting publishers with advertisers. Google has long been seen as the dominant supplier of tools at almost every step in this process, which argues critics, allows the company to present preferential treatment with their own systems and sending competitors. Some Google offers came from acquisitions, such as the purchase of DoubleClick in 2007.
But Brinkema rejected the allegation of the Department of Justice that Google illegally monopolized the market of some tools used by advertisers to buy advertisements, claiming that the definition of the market by the government was too narrow and poorly defined. As a result, Google was not described as a monopolist, because he refers to tools to buy advertising, but was considered one on the publisher tools for the sale of advertising space.
The company is based on the fact that not all claims of the plaintiff will stand in court. Google Vice President for Regulation, Lee-Anne Mulholland, issued a statement about X, stating that Google won “half of the case” and that the company plans to appeal from the second half.
“The court said that our advertisers’ tools and our acquisitions, such as DoubleClick, do not harm competition. We do not agree with the Court’s decision about our publisher tools. Publishers have many options and choose Google, because our advertising tools are basic, inexpensive and effective,” said Mulholland.
The ad tech lawsuit was first filed in January 2023 by the Department of Justice and eight states, which claimed that Google illegally crushed competition on the advertising market, acting as a powerful intermediary in the advertising industry and accepting high advertising revenues. Google argued that there is a lot of competition on the online advertising market. The case went to the trial in September last year, and the closing arguments were delivered in November.
The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to the request for a comment on the decision. Jonathan Kanter, a lawyer who supervised the trial during his stay in the section, wrote on x This Thursday ruling “is a huge victory for the enforcement of antitrust law, the media industry and free and open internet.”
In August last year, the District Judge of the Colombia District Amit Mehta ruled that Google maintained an illegal monopoly in both the general search and general text advertising. The Department of Justice suggested that Google receive an order “immediately and in full sale” of his chrome web browser, and will also stop paying to partners such as Apple, for preferential treatment on iPhones. Google is fighting suggestions, and Mehta will start before the final remedy on Monday.
Brinkema asked Google and the Department of Justice to propose a schedule for determining the remedies in the advertising case. As a result of this process, you can order the company to sell your advertising tools for publishers.