{"id":130226,"date":"2024-11-26T09:30:50","date_gmt":"2024-11-26T02:30:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/?p=130226"},"modified":"2024-11-26T09:30:50","modified_gmt":"2024-11-26T02:30:50","slug":"google-and-the-doj-make-their-final-arguments-in-the-ad-tech-monopoly-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/?p=130226","title":{"rendered":"Google and the DOJ make their final arguments in the ad tech monopoly case"},"content":{"rendered":"<p> <script async src=\"https:\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/js\/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-3711241968723425\"\r\n     crossorigin=\"anonymous\"><\/script>\r\n<ins class=\"adsbygoogle\"\r\n     style=\"display:block\"\r\n     data-ad-format=\"fluid\"\r\n     data-ad-layout-key=\"-fb+5w+4e-db+86\"\r\n     data-ad-client=\"ca-pub-3711241968723425\"\r\n     data-ad-slot=\"7910942971\"><\/ins>\r\n<script>\r\n     (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});\r\n<\/script><br \/>\n<\/p>\n<div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">Google and the Department of Justice met one final time in an Alexandria, Virginia courtroom to debate the future of Google\u2019s online ad tech juggernaut.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">Over about three hours of closing arguments, attorneys for each side<strong> <\/strong>delivered their last arguments before US District Court judge Leonie Brinkema, who is expected to rule on it by the end of 2024. If she declares Google\u2019s ad tech system a monopoly, the case will progress to a second trial for remedies \u2014 a process currently <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theverge.com\/2024\/10\/9\/24265983\/doj-google-search-remedies-monopoly\">playing out in a separate DC District Court case over Google search.<\/a> <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">Many of the arguments were familiar to any Google trial watcher. The DOJ argues Google used a suite of ad tech products, particularly Doubleclick For Publishers (DFP) and the AdX exchange, to <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theverge.com\/2024\/9\/11\/24241386\/former-news-corp-executive-google-doj-ad-tech-trial\">strong-arm site owners<\/a> and advertisers. Google counters that it faces competition from other sources and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theverge.com\/2024\/10\/1\/24258771\/doj-google-ad-tech-antitrust-case-market-definition\">shouldn\u2019t have to<\/a> cut deals with competitors. But the final statements let Brinkema, who spent the trial\u2019s early days asking witnesses to break down complex technical topics, push back on each side\u2019s arguments \u2014 this time with a solid command of the facts.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><h3 class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-heading mb-20 mt-40 font-polysans text-26 font-medium leading-110 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple md:text-30 [&amp;&gt;a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;&gt;a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin [&amp;&gt;a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;&gt;a]:shadow-underline-white\">One market, or three?<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">One of the trial\u2019s biggest questions is how many markets Google actually works in. The government sees three separate ad markets that Google dominates: one for publisher ad servers, one for ad exchanges, and one for advertiser ad networks. Google says there\u2019s a single, two-sided market of buyers and sellers for digital ads, putting Google in competition with social media companies like Meta and TikTok.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">Google\u2019s reference point is a 2018 Supreme Court precedent called <em>Ohio v. American Express. <\/em>The ruling considered whether a policy AmEx imposed on merchants unfairly suppressed price competition. The court decided that there was a single market comprised of merchants and credit card users, and it required the government to prove harm on both sides \u2014 a higher standard to meet.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">The government<strong> <\/strong>in this case has argued this isn\u2019t a reasonable comparison, and in closing arguments, Brinkema seemed to agree. \u201cI\u2019ve read that <em>AmEx<\/em> case more times that I probably should have,\u201d Brinkema said during Google counsel Karen Dunn\u2019s closing arguments. \u201cWe\u2019re dealing with a completely different set-up, it seems to me.\u201d Brinkema said that earlier in the case, she thought Google made \u201ca very attractive argument\u201d for its <em>AmEx<\/em> comparison, but the more she read it, the less it mapped onto this case.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">Still, Brinkema asked why the government focused most of its attention during the trial on publishers and called ad agency witnesses rather than advertisers themselves. DOJ counsel Aaron Teitelbaum said publishers\u2019 issues with Google (like frustrating ties between DFP and AdX) were particularly good at highlighting anticompetitive conduct, that stemmed from Google\u2019s access to advertisers through its ad network,\u00a0and that ad agencies \u2014 not their advertiser clients \u2014\u00a0were the ones typically navigating Google\u2019s products.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">She also asked how the DOJ would attempt to win if she finds a single, two-sided market. Teitelbaum said that even in that scenario, the court can find direct evidence of monopoly power where Google does something it knows customers won\u2019t like \u2014 like Unified Pricing Rules (UPR) that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.theverge.com\/2024\/9\/13\/24243342\/google-doj-ad-tech-antitrust-unified-pricing-rules\">prevented publishers<\/a> from setting higher prices on Google\u2019s AdX than on other servers. That\u2019s something only a monopolist could do, he said.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><h3 class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-heading mb-20 mt-40 font-polysans text-26 font-medium leading-110 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple md:text-30 [&amp;&gt;a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;&gt;a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin [&amp;&gt;a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;&gt;a]:shadow-underline-white\">Refusal to deal<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">Google\u2019s second big legal weapon is a 2004 ruling known as <em>Verizon v. Trinko \u2014 <\/em>which said, very broadly, that Verizon wasn\u2019t required to share its telecommunications network with AT&amp;T<em>. Trinko<\/em> says under most circumstances, companies can refuse to deal with competitors. Google argues that its products are already interoperable with other ad tech services, and requiring <em>more <\/em>of that interoperability by law would make Google\u2019s advertiser customer base into \u201ccommunity property.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">The DOJ has retorted that <em>Trinko <\/em>isn\u2019t about dealing with your own customers. \u201cEvery single instance of conduct is Google versus its customers,\u201d Teitelbaum said \u2014 pointing to instances where Google removed options for users in its ad tools. But Brinkema seemed unsure of that argument, saying AdX in particular seems to be in direct competition with other ad exchanges, and is not customer-facing in the way the DOJ tried to argue.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><h3 class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-heading mb-20 mt-40 font-polysans text-26 font-medium leading-110 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple md:text-30 [&amp;&gt;a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;&gt;a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin [&amp;&gt;a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;&gt;a]:shadow-underline-white\">What about those deleted chats?<\/h3>\n<\/p>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">As Google makes its arguments, it\u2019s being dogged by an accusation that\u2019s followed it into courtroom after courtroom: a claim that it deliberately deleted chat messages that could have made it look bad. Google says most messages were simply casual water-cooler conversation, but it\u2019s conceded some included substantive business discussions. The DOJ wants Brinkema to draw an adverse inference wherever she\u2019s in doubt about what deleted messages said \u2014\u00a0in other words, assume the deleted messages would have looked bad for Google\u2019s case.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">Dunn, from Google, accused the government of cherry-picking ominous-sounding lines from Google executives in internal documents. When read with full context, Dunn argued, some simply show people riffing on topics where they acknowledge they have little expertise. They could even demonstrate that Google welcomed employees sharing thoughts over email.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"duet--article--article-body-component\">\n<p class=\"duet--article--dangerously-set-cms-markup duet--article--standard-paragraph mb-20 font-fkroman text-18 leading-160 -tracking-1 selection:bg-franklin-20 dark:text-white dark:selection:bg-blurple [&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-franklin dark:[&amp;_a:hover]:shadow-highlight-blurple [&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-black dark:[&amp;_a]:shadow-underline-white\">But Brinkema said that Dunn was \u201cgetting close to the very significant argument plaintiffs have raised\u201d: the fact that <em>nobody actually knows<\/em> what executives were thinking in some cases, because those chats are gone. \u201cI think you\u2019re in a little bit [of] dangerous territory,\u201d she warned.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><script async src=\"https:\/\/pagead2.googlesyndication.com\/pagead\/js\/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-3711241968723425\"\r\n     crossorigin=\"anonymous\"><\/script>\r\n<ins class=\"adsbygoogle\"\r\n     style=\"display:block\"\r\n     data-ad-format=\"fluid\"\r\n     data-ad-layout-key=\"-fb+5w+4e-db+86\"\r\n     data-ad-client=\"ca-pub-3711241968723425\"\r\n     data-ad-slot=\"7910942971\"><\/ins>\r\n<script>\r\n     (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});\r\n<\/script><br \/>\n<br \/><div data-type=\"_mgwidget\" data-widget-id=\"1660802\">\r\n<\/div>\r\n<script>(function(w,q){w[q]=w[q]||[];w[q].push([\"_mgc.load\"])})(window,\"_mgq\");\r\n<\/script>\r\n<br \/>\n<br \/><a href=\"https:\/\/www.theverge.com\/2024\/11\/25\/24305748\/google-doj-ad-tech-monopoly-closing-arguments\">Source link <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Google and the Department of Justice met one final time in an Alexandria, Virginia courtroom to debate the future of Google\u2019s online ad tech juggernaut. Over about three hours of &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/?p=130226\" class=\"more-link\">Read More<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-130226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-business","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/130226","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=130226"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/130226\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=130226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=130226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hotvideos24.online\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=130226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}