Arthur T Knackerbracket has processed the following story:
The US Department of Justice has confirmed its intention to pursue a breakup of Google's advertising technology business, escalating the stakes in a high-profile antitrust battle. The DOJ is seeking a court order to force Google to divest key parts of its ad tech operations, including its ad exchange and publisher ad server, as part of efforts to restore competition in the digital advertising market.
This confirmation came during a hearing where US District Judge Leonie Brinkema set a trial date for September 22 to determine the appropriate remedies following last month's ruling that Google illegally monopolized critical segments of online advertising technology.
The judge's earlier decision found that Google unlawfully maintained monopoly power by tying its publisher ad server – software that helps websites manage and sell ad space – with its ad exchange, where advertisers bid for that space.
Judge Brinkema emphasized that this conduct harmed publishers, competitors, and consumers by restricting competition and locking publishers into Google's ecosystem. However, the court did not find Google to hold a monopoly over advertiser-facing tools, narrowing the scope of the ruling.
The DOJ's proposed remedy is a phased approach beginning with Google providing real-time access to bidding data from its ad exchange to rival publisher ad servers. Ultimately, the government wants Google to sell off its ad exchange and publisher ad server businesses, a process DOJ attorney Julia Tarver Wood acknowledged could take several years. "Leaving Google with 90 percent of publishers dependent on them is, frankly, too dangerous," Wood said.
Google vehemently opposes the breakup plan, arguing that the DOJ's demands exceed the court's findings and lack a legal basis. Karen Dunn, Google's lead attorney, described the forced divestiture as "very likely completely impossible" and warned it would cause "serious complications," including the loss of important privacy and security protections.
Dunn also questioned whether there are buyers that can run the complex ad tech systems outside of massive tech companies.
Instead, Google has proposed behavioral remedies, such as sharing a limited subset of ad data with competitors and ending certain anticompetitive pricing practices, including unified pricing.
The company also pledged not to reinstate discontinued tactics like "last look," which previously allowed Google to outbid rivals at the last moment. To oversee compliance, Google suggested appointing a court monitor, but Judge Brinkema appeared skeptical of this approach during the hearing.
Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, criticized the DOJ's breakup proposals as "go[ing] well beyond the Court's findings, have no basis in law, and would harm publishers and advertisers." She reiterated Google's intent to appeal the ruling.
Also see: Google fights back: proposes to limit default search agreements, wants to avoid selling Chrome
The trial scheduled for September will mark a critical juncture in this legal saga, which follows similar antitrust challenges Google faces in its search business and the ownership of Chrome, the dominant browser in desktop computers and all Android phones.
Judge Amit Mehta is expected to rule on remedies in that case by August, with Google also confronting ongoing litigation over its Play Store policies. Together, these cases could lead to unprecedented structural changes for Google, potentially reshaping the digital economy.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Saturday May 10, @03:58AM (8 children)
Though these monopolies are far from perfect with several really more of an oligopoly, right now along with Google, we have Amazon monopolizing online retail, Nvidia monopolizing graphics hardware, Microsoft still monopolizing the OS and office software, and Apple monopolizing tablets and very strong in smartphones. Intel has been a near monopoly in CPUs, but stunningly, they are looking a bit wobbly these days. For ISPs, there are only a handful of players there: Verizon, Spectrum, AT&T, Comcast. Same goes for cellular phone service. Big bad IBM is still around, though you don't hear about them so much any more.
It just seems that anti-trust actions ought to have been brought against a whole lot more than Google. Yeah, they did break up AT&T (Ma Bell) in the 1980s, but stunningly, AT&T has reconstituted itself. And they brought Microsoft to trial. Beyond that, it's been little more than rumblings.
(Score: 2, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 10, @07:13AM (6 children)
Seen from Europe, this looks like the "failure to regulate monopolies" is all due to MONEY.
The obvious fact is that the USA is MASSIVELY corrupt compared to the very worst African countries.
The rest of the world is entirely fed up with this abusive behaviour, and if you need evidence:
Trump.
Musk
Gates
Ellison
etc
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 10, @07:28PM (5 children)
you're not wrong, these fools see some of those peeps as heroes, and the ones they don't like aren't triggering the scrutiny they should. elon's antics have at least stunned them into silence, but i doubt it's enough.
we're on a path that'll lead to us being force-fed humble pie.
(Score: 1, Troll) by DadaDoofy on Sunday May 11, @03:16PM (4 children)
"we have quite a few people in the usa who have been fed pro-capitalism propaganda"
By who? US "education", mainstream media (NBC/ABC/CBS/CNN/MSNBC) and government run media (PBS/NPR) feed nothing but pro-Marxist propaganda.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 11, @04:08PM
i guess what im really asking is how you managed to believe your own silliness long enough to hit "submit"? the larger part of the media, for example... you know, the one you purposefully skipped despite it clearly impacting your "u marxist!!" political views, has been making excuses for the current administration. like right now, while shit's falling apart.
it's mother's day, take the day off and let your brain cool a bit.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday May 11, @05:36PM (2 children)
Heh. You missed a big one there, Doofy.
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Sunday May 11, @06:13PM (1 child)
If you are talking about Fox/Newsmax/OAN, they weren't mentioned because everyone already knows those are just fringe outlets that serve up conspiracy theories.
(Score: 2) by Tork on Sunday May 11, @06:33PM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 11, @04:02AM
A trial that went nowhere. If you want to know why, look up Microsoft's political donations before and after the start of that trial.
here's a start [zdnet.com]
(Score: 2) by DadaDoofy on Sunday May 11, @03:08PM
"Karen Dunn, Google's lead attorney, described the forced divestiture as "very likely completely impossible" and warned it would cause "serious complications," including the loss of important privacy and security protections."
I bet she even had a straight face when she said it. Pretty rich coming from a company that earns a handsome profit on your privacy and security.