Google Says US Justice Department Complaint 'Without Merit'

Alphabet's Google says it believes the complaint from the U.S. Department of Justice accusing the company of abusing its dominance in digital advertising is "without merit." From a report: The company also added it will "defend itself vigorously". The government on Tuesday said Google should be forced to sell its ad manager suite, tackling a business that generated about 12% of Google's revenue in 2021 while also playing a vital role in the search engine and cloud company's overall sales. Google, which depends on its advertising business for about 80% of its revenue, said the government was "doubling down on a flawed argument that would slow innovation, raise advertising fees and make it harder for thousands of small businesses and publishers to grow." The federal government has said its Big Tech investigations and lawsuits are aimed at leveling the playing field for smaller rivals who are up against a group of powerful companies that include Amazon, Facebook-owner Meta and Apple.

They should sue the phonebook printers

[nospam007]

Their ads can't be beaten either.

Obvious?

[Trip Ericson]

I mean, did anyone really expect them to come out and say "You know what? DoJ is right. We *are* a monopoly that needs to be broken up!"

Of course not. If they had, that would be news. This is not.

Re:

[Ungrounded Lightning]

If they had [said You know what? DoJ is right. We *are* a monopoly that needs to be broken up!"], that would be news. This is not.

What they said is not news. That they said it just now is.

In addition to confirming, for a general/nerdish audience the expected behavior on Google's part and filling in the details, it gives a timeline marker and status update for those tracking the DoJ's actions against Google who might be affected by the fallout from the dispute. (Stockholders and stock traders, just for sta

Re:

[pete6677]

Yup. The standard corporate response to any lawsuit whatsoever should be "these claims are without merit, and we will defend ourselves vigorously". Then say nothing more about it.

Lack of transparency destroys trust

[TomGreenhaw]

I get that Google must battle bad actors trying to game the system for search engine optimization.

Their complete lack of transparency about their algorithms however create a huge amount of distrust. Moreover their policies has spawned a huge fraudulent industry for SEO services. Additionally the tools available to remove pages from their index are essentially useless creating technical headaches as well as major privacy and security concerns.

In today's political environment, Tech companies are a juicy target for corrupt politicians who want preferential treatment. In related news, Google apparently plans to no longer filter political spam,l probably hoping to placate the politicians.

Google, please publish your policies and provide tools to allow end users to manage how their pages are indexed. The truth will set you free from conspiracy theories.

Re:Lack of transparency destroys trust

[WCLPeter]

The truth will set you free from conspiracy theories.

Unfortunately it won't, conspiracy nutters don't accept truth since they're wired to believe everyone is lying to them.

They'll just spew some nonsense about trying to make themselves look good while hiding all their bad deeds, then point to a story from a friend of a friend who's second cousin's roommate who used to work at the DOJ with a best friend's uncle who worked at the FBI who told them that Google has a secret division which does the exact opposite of what they say they're doing and that the CIA knows about it.

Which, ironically, will end up getting boosted in the conspiracy circles because the algorithms Google uses will just push that narrative to the other nutters.

Re:

[TomGreenhaw]

I suppose you are right - you can't fix stupid.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Some conspiracy nuts are off the deep end, but that's not a reason for google not to be transparent. Google's search result quality has noticeably declined over the last several years and it'd be nice to know specifically why. That way, legal attacks against them as a company will be fairly grounded in their actual policy, rather than wild speculation. And I mean capital-A Actual policy, like what's being exposed with twitter. The kind of stuff that makes slashbot ArchieBunker seethe and gnash his teeth whe

Re:

[bruce_the_moose]

On the contrary, Google is going to STOP exempting political campaign email from spam filtering. https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]

Re:

[TomGreenhaw]

Thanks for pointing that out. I misread the article I saw. I guess it explains why they are now under attack after all.

Re: Lack of transparency destroys trust

[LindleyF]

It's ok, the people complaining most about getting filtered never opted into the pilot program anyway.

Re:

[SvnLyrBrto]

robots.txt is "essentially useless creating technical headaches as well as major privacy and security concerns."? Because, except for kludgy crap forced on Google by those corrupt politicians you've mentioned have made Google their juicy target, that's the only tool to remove pages from the index they should ever have needed, considered, or implemented.

Re:

[TomGreenhaw]

Google even tells you that robot.txt is useless with them for not indexing pages. See: https://developers.google.com/... [google.com]

They should absolutely honor it and they don't really.

Seems legit

[sinij]

I Googled this, no issues were found.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

I Googled the Biden docs scandal and was told "There is no there there."

Double-Cluck

[flyingfsck]

Ever since the heyday of Double-Click, internet advertising has been a mixed blessing.

well...

[argStyopa]

...what ELSE were they going to say?
How is this news?

Factual Question

[quantaman]

Does Google skew search results to disadvantage competitors?

If they do, then go at 'em, that's the definition of abusing your monopoly in one field to harm competitors in another field. The same thing for which MS got off easy when they used the dominance of Windows to establish their Internet Browser and Office products.

But if the DOJ is going after Google just because they're big then I don't really see the problem. There are definitely competitors in online advertising and I'm not sure I see the harm to the consumer.

Eeextreee! Eeextree!

[zarmanto]

Eeextreee! Eeextree! Read all about it! Defendant claims allegations are without merit! Will defend itself vigorously! Prosecution is shocked that defendant didn't just fess up to all wrongdoings! Read all about it!

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Google should heed Bill Gates' advice

[Tablizer]

Bill Gates has said he should have settled the anti-trust case sooner, with a decent compromise. Stonewalling did more harm than good.

Re:

[pete6677]

Microsoft did quite well. They were convicted monopolists, but then they aggressively lobbied and bought politicians. This resulted in the penalties being watered down to the point of being effectively non-existent. Then they got to really kick their monopoly into high gear. Remember around 2005 when Office/Windows was the only game in town? No corporation could get away without paying the Microsoft tax. Google could only dream of being so successful.

Re:

[Tablizer]

Gates wanted it all, not just "did quite well".

So, it's true, then

[WillAffleckUW]

Obviously teh Google got caught and now they pay the penalties.

Is so sad. Having of many tears am I. Beklempt.

What Else Would They Say?

[gflash]

"Hey, you got us. Our bad" ???

Quite surprising

[BrookSmith]

Quite surprising, usually the big corporates come right out and say, "Ok you got us".