The U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of states have launched their antitrust case against tech giant Google, alleging the company has built and maintained a monopoly over the online advertising technology market. The trial, which began on September 9, 2024 in the U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, marks the latest chapter in the government’s efforts to rein in Big Tech’s growing power and influence.
At the heart of the case is the claim that Google has used its dominance in the ad tech space to control the flow of online advertising, ultimately harming publishers, advertisers, and consumers. The government contends that Google’s practices have allowed it to keep as much as 36 cents on the dollar when brokering sales between publishers and advertisers.
Julia Tarver Wood, the government’s lead trial lawyer, laid out the case against Google in her opening statement. She argued that Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick, completed in 2008, was a pivotal moment in the company’s quest for ad tech dominance. Wood stated, “Google is not here because they are big. They are here because they used that size to crush competition.”
The Justice Department alleges that Google now controls an 87% market share in ad-selling technology, giving it unprecedented power to set prices and take a more significant portion of each ad sale. This dominance, they argue, has been particularly harmful to news publishers and other website owners who rely on advertising revenue to sustain their operations.
One of the critical issues at stake is Google’s control over multiple aspects of the ad tech ecosystem. The government claims that Google has built a monopoly over the software that matches online publishers with advertisers, as well as the ad exchange market that facilitates these transactions. This level of control, they argue, allows Google to manipulate the market to its advantage.
Google, for its part, vehemently denies these allegations. The company’s lead attorney, Karen Dunn, countered the government’s claims by arguing that they are based on an outdated view of the internet and advertising landscape. Dunn likened the government’s case to a “time capsule with a Blackberry, an iPod, and a Blockbuster video card.”
Google’s defense rests on the argument that the online advertising market has evolved significantly since it acquired DoubleClick. The company contends that advertisers now have a wide array of options beyond traditional display ads, including social media platforms like TikTok and streaming TV services. Google also points to the shift in consumer attention towards mobile apps and social media sites as evidence that the government’s case fails to account for the current realities of the digital advertising landscape.
The trial is expected to feature testimony from a range of witnesses, including executives from newspaper publishers who claim to have been particularly harmed by Google’s practices. One such executive, Tim Wolfe from Gannett, a major newspaper publisher that has utilized Google for the last 13 years, stated that the company feels it has no choice but to continue using Google’s ad tech products because there are no other options.
The government’s case will also attempt to use Google’s own internal communications against the company. Prosecutors plan to present evidence, including an email from a Google employee questioning whether the company’s control over all three sides of the ad tech market presented a “deeper issue.”
This trial follows another significant legal defeat for Google. A judge recently declared Google’s search engine a monopoly in a separate antitrust case focused on its search engine. The outcome of this new trial could potentially have even more far-reaching consequences for the tech giant.
If Judge Leonie Brinkema, who presides over the case, finds that Google has violated antitrust laws, the remedies could be substantial. The most dramatic potential outcome would be an order requiring Google to sell off parts of its ad tech business, which generates billions of dollars in annual revenue.
The stakes are high not just for Google, but for the entire tech industry. This case is part of a broader push by regulators to address the growing power of Big Tech companies. Similar antitrust actions are underway against other tech giants, including Apple, Amazon, and Meta.