The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has urged a federal judge to hold Alphabet’s Google accountable for illegally monopolizing the online advertising market, citing its unfair dominance in the technology that powers digital ads. This case, the latest in a series of antitrust battles against Google, seeks to secure a significant legal victory for the DOJ, highlighting the company’s anticompetitive practices.
The closing arguments of the 15-day trial in Alexandria, Virginia, underscored the DOJ’s case that Google has manipulated the market for publisher ad servers, advertiser networks, and ad exchanges—the critical systems that connect advertisers and publishers online. The DOJ’s lawyers argue that Google’s actions have stifled competition and harmed both publishers and advertisers by consolidating control over digital advertising.
In his closing remarks, DOJ lawyer Aaron Teitelbaum accused Google of “rigging the rules of the road” to cement its monopolistic position in the digital advertising sector. Teitelbaum argued that Google’s tactics—spanning multiple areas of the ad tech industry—prove its dominance is not just pervasive, but a direct violation of antitrust laws. “Google is once, twice, three times a monopolist,” he asserted.
Julia Tarver Wood, another DOJ lawyer, echoed these sentiments, drawing parallels to Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities as she explained the core issue at stake: whether Judge Leonie Brinkema would side with the DOJ’s view of an unfair market or accept Google’s narrative of a competitive, open marketplace.
Google, however, has firmly denied the charges. In her closing statement, Google lawyer Karen Dunn contended that the DOJ had failed to meet its legal burden and accused the government of trying to overstep legal precedents. Dunn argued that Google’s business decisions were legitimate and that the online advertising market was competitive. She further stated that the government was focusing too narrowly on specific aspects of the market while ignoring broader competition from other players.
Despite Google’s defense, the trial revealed powerful testimony from publishers, who explained how they felt trapped by Google’s dominance. Many testified that they could not afford to switch away from Google’s ad platform, even when the company introduced features they disliked, due to the sheer scale of its advertising network. One witness recalled how News Corp (NWSA.O) estimated a loss of at least $9 million in ad revenue in 2017 had they attempted to move away from Google’s ad services.
If Judge Brinkema finds Google’s actions unlawful, the DOJ has requested that Google be required to sell off parts of its ad tech business, particularly the Google Ad Manager platform, which includes both the company’s publisher ad server and ad exchange.
This case, however, is seen by analysts as having smaller financial implications than Google’s ongoing battle over its monopoly in online search—a matter in which a judge has already ruled in favor of the government. While Google’s market share in search remains a focal point, this latest case about ad tech could be a pivotal moment in regulating Google’s vast influence over the digital economy.
Alphabet’s shares rose 1.4% in afternoon trading, reflecting investor optimism that the company might prevail in this particular trial, even as the broader legal challenges continue to mount.
Read more:
Biden Administration Cuts Intel’S Chips Grant Amid Company Struggles
Trump’s Immigration Strategy: Military Resources And Legal Hurdles Ahead
Legal Experts Warn Of Challenges To Trump’s Birthright Citizenship Plans