What you need to know
- U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema has reportedly determined that Alphabet, the parent company of Google, has transformed its ad-tech space into an illegal monopoly.
- Brinkema clarified that this ruling pertains to the “advertising exchanges and tools” used for selling ad space, rather than purchasing display ads.
- Google defended itself by claiming that publishers have multiple options and choose Google because it offers simplicity and affordability compared to its competitors.
- Google’s recent statements align with previous reports from late last year when the Department of Justice (DOJ) accused the company of being a monopolist multiple times.
A U.S. federal judge has delivered a ruling on the antitrust case against Google’s alleged monopoly on ad space.
Leonie Brinkema, the U.S. District Judge, announced on Thursday (Apr. 17) that Alphabet violated antitrust laws related to advertisements. The violation specifically involves “advertising exchanges and tools used by websites to sell ad space,” as reported by Bloomberg.
In contrast, Brinkema stated that Google does not meet the definition of a monopoly in the context of buying display ads, addressing the other aspect of the case.
Advertisements are a crucial element of Google’s business, prompting the U.S. government to investigate its monopoly power. Brinkema stated on Thursday that Google engaged in anticompetitive actions to gain and maintain its monopoly status in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets.
According to the judge, Google strengthened its monopoly in the ad space by preventing competitors from entering the market, hindering competition and violating the competitive process.
Google defended its position by highlighting that publishers choose Google for its straightforward, cost-effective, and efficient ad tech tools.
Google’s Antitrust Battle
The case is ongoing, with Judge Leonie Brinkema tasked with determining the merit of the ad monopoly allegations against Google. As there appears to be some merit to the case, the involved parties will proceed with seeking a remedy through separate court proceedings.
The DOJ’s investigation into Google’s alleged monopolistic behavior began last November, culminating in accusations of Google being a repeated monopolist. During the antitrust case’s closing arguments, U.S. lawyers pointed to Google’s acquisition of Doubleclick as evidence of its advertising monopoly. Google maintains its position by asserting that the DOJ’s claims are unfounded.
Google argues that its practices have driven innovation in response to competition and have contributed significantly to its revenue, reaching $31 billion in 2023, reflecting a healthy market.
Aside from the ad-tech monopoly case, there is also a separate court case addressing Google’s search monopoly. The DOJ is pressuring Google to divest Chrome following a ruling that Google unlawfully maintained a search monopoly. The judge is also recommending that Google separate Android from Search and Play and revise its data licensing practices.
Bloomberg reports that a new trial will commence on Monday (Apr. 21) to determine a resolution to this ongoing situation.