US Says Google Is an Ad Tech Monopolist, in Closing Arguments (nytimes.com) 21
Lawyers for the United States on Monday said that Google had created a monopoly with its services to place ads online, closing out an antitrust trial over the company's dominance in advertising technology that could add to the Silicon Valley giant's mounting woes. From a report: The legal case concerns a system of software that is used by advertisers to place ads on websites around the internet. Aaron Teitelbaum, a lawyer for the Justice Department, told Judge Leonie M. Brinkema of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia that the company had linked its products together in a way that made it hard for publishers and advertisers to use alternatives.
"Google is once, twice, three times a monopolist," he said. "These are the markets that make the free and open internet possible." Google's lead lawyer, Karen Dunn, countered that the government had failed to offer the evidence to prove its case and was on shaky legal ground. "Google's conduct is a story of innovation in response to competition," she said. The arguments conclude U.S. et al. v. Google, an antitrust suit that the Justice Department and eight states filed against Google last year. (More states have joined the suit since then.) The agency and states accused the internet giant of abusing control of its ad technology and violating antitrust law, in part through the acquisition of the advertising software company Doubleclick in 2008. Next, Judge Brinkema will decide the merits of the case in the coming months.
"Google is once, twice, three times a monopolist," he said. "These are the markets that make the free and open internet possible." Google's lead lawyer, Karen Dunn, countered that the government had failed to offer the evidence to prove its case and was on shaky legal ground. "Google's conduct is a story of innovation in response to competition," she said. The arguments conclude U.S. et al. v. Google, an antitrust suit that the Justice Department and eight states filed against Google last year. (More states have joined the suit since then.) The agency and states accused the internet giant of abusing control of its ad technology and violating antitrust law, in part through the acquisition of the advertising software company Doubleclick in 2008. Next, Judge Brinkema will decide the merits of the case in the coming months.
they should sell/split off adsense and youtube (Score:3)
they should sell/split off adsense and youtube
Strange (Score:3)
Weren't they complaining about Facebook and advertising, then Twitter/X for advertising, then this or that company? How about Apple forcing everything to go through the App Store, or to pay Apple for apps that might be side-loaded on an Apple device without going through ANY Apple service, they don't do ANYTHING there, right?
Re:Strange (Score:4, Informative)
remove tracking and problems will go away (Score:4, Interesting)
Make a general law that bans user tracking. Then the online advantage over traditional ad systems vanishes.
Re: (Score:3)
Let's get Leon Musk and Jeff Bezos to write it. Fortunately the upcoming administration is definitely opposed to exploitation!
Google is cancer of Internet (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Vehement agreement!
A bad threshold was reached the day that random sites started displaying popup messages (hosted by Google) that say "Hey! You aren't logged-in to this site using your Google account! Click here and I will do that for you automatically." When sites started allowing that, they handed the the keys over to Google. Now, your Google account is the gatekeeper to the web. Now many sites won't even work unless you are logged-in.
This is what Google wanted from Google+, and they achieved it even
Re: (Score:3)
A bad threshold was reached the day that random sites started displaying popup messages (hosted by Google) that say "Hey! You aren't logged-in to this site using your Google account! Click here and I will do that for you automatically."
To which I click "No."
Now many sites won't even work unless you are logged-in.
Which sites are those? For anything requiring a login, I have a separate log-in for. I'm unaware of anything non-Google that *requires* a Google account.
Re: (Score:2)
I've said it before (Score:3)
Of all the grievances I have against monopolies and duopolies, I've never once longed for more competition in the field of companies that show me ads.
So, it costs your business too much money to run ads because one company has sucked up all the oxygen? Let me play you a sad song on the world's smallest violin.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember when Google's thing was unobtrusive text-only ads. In a world where Doubleclick's claim to fame was inventing the popup it was refreshing, and Google used that as a competitive advantage.
It worked. Google succeeded. Enough that they bought Doubleclick. And started showing more and more intrusive ads.
Re: (Score:2)
decision takes months? (Score:2)
"Judge Brinkema will decide the merits of the case in the coming months"
I don't understand why judges in cases like this require months to make a decision. Were they not paying attention during the trial? A jury is typically expected to reach a decision within hours or days.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I hear you, but months? I figure the clerks(s) do the legal research and write a significant chunk of it. Probably an AI could write a credible draft these days based on just an outline.
Re: (Score:2)
Google is the buyer, seller and auctioneer (Score:3)
If you're a company want to buy or sell ad-space, you have to do so through Google, who also own the auction house. Economists call this monopolistic "self-preferencing" and vertical integration abuse.
Buyers and sellers call it "the only game in town". They know it's rigged, but they'd rather play than fold.
They'd definitely like it better if the agency that buys for advertisers, the agency that sells for the publishers and the auction house were three separate companies.
Should have never changed their motto (Score:2)
There are other online ad platforms... (Score:2)