US-Google face off as ad tech antitrust case comes to an end

Google and the US government faced off in federal court on Monday; Both sides delivered closing arguments in a case revolving around the tech giant’s unfair dominance of online advertising.

The hearing in Virginia federal court is Google’s second U.S. antitrust case currently underway at a time when the U.S. government is trying to rein in the power of big tech.

In a separate hearing, a judge in Washington ruled that Google’s search business is an illegal monopoly, and the U.S. Justice Department wants Google to sell its Chrome browser business to resolve the case.

The latest lawsuit, also filed by the Department of Justice, focuses on ad technology for the open web, the complex system that determines what online ads people see as they browse the web.

The plaintiffs claim that the vast majority of websites use a trio of Google adware products, which together leave publishers with no way to evade Google’s advertising technology.

Publishers including News Corp and Gannett publishing have complained they are reliant on Google’s ad technology to run ads on their websites.

“Google is a monopolist once, twice, three times over,” Justice Department attorney Aaron Teitelbaum told the court in his closing argument.

Chief justice Leonie Brinkema said she would submit her opinion as soon as next month.

Whatever Brinkema’s decision is, the outcome will almost certainly be appealed, a protracted process that could go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The government claims that Google controls the auction-style system that advertisers use to buy advertising space online.

U.S. lawyers argue that this approach allows Google to charge higher prices to advertisers and send less revenue to publishers, many of whom are struggling to stay afloat, such as news sites.

The US argues that Google is using its financial power to win over potential rivals and capture the ad tech market, leaving advertisers and publishers no choice but to use its technology.

The government wants Google to divest part of its ad tech business.

Google rejected the allegations as an attempt by the government to pick “winners and losers” in a diverse market.

The company argues that the display ads in question are only a small part of today’s ad tech business.

Google says the plaintiffs’ definition of the market ignores ads that are also placed in search results, apps and social media platforms, which Google does not dominate when taken as a whole.

“The law does not support the plaintiffs’ argument in this case,” Google attorney Karen Dunn said.

He warned that if Google loses the case, the winners will be rival tech giants such as Microsoft, Meta or Amazon, whose market share in online advertising increases while Google’s share declines.

The DOJ disagreed, saying it “doesn’t matter” if Google competes in the broader market for online ads.

“This is a different question than the market for advertising on websites, which is the target of the lawsuit,” Teitelbaum said.

Google also points to legal precedent in the United States, saying claims similar to the government’s have been rejected in previous antitrust cases.

Dunn also warned that forcing Google to work with rivals on advertising products would amount to government central planning that the court should reject.

If the judge finds Google at fault, a new phase of the trial will decide how the company must comply with that conclusion.

And all of this could be invalidated if the incoming Trump administration decides to drop the case.

The president-elect has criticized Google but warned earlier this month that breaking it up could be “a very dangerous thing.”