Government bodies have been diligently working to make sure that businesses are not breaking antitrust laws and that there is fair competition within the sector. The continuous examination has been challenging for Google this year, as the company found itself in a legal dispute with the Department of Justice (DOJ).
Google and the Department of Justice recently concluded their final arguments in an Alexandria, Virginia courtroom in the case challenging Google’s dominance in online ad tech.
Attorneys for each side continued to put up their arguments for over three hours before Leonie Brinkema, the US District Court judge. If Brinkema’s judgement declares the ad tech of Google as a monopoly, the case would head towards its second trial looking for remedies.
Google has been accused by the DOJ of monopolizing three separate markets, advertiser ad networks, publisher ad servers and ad exchanges. In counter to this, Google put forward its argument that there is only one market for digital ads where it competes with other platforms such as TikTok and Meta.
The DOJ has also argued that Google makes use of a suite of ad tech products to give an upper hand to owners of the suite of ad advertisers. Whereas, Google counters it with the statement that it faces competition from other sources hence they don’t need to cut deals with competitors.
The outcome of this case will impact the future of online advertising and might reshape the digital landscape.
The core of the dispute lies in the interpretation of the 2018 Supreme Court case Ohio v. American Express. Google has contended that this case has set higher standards for proving monopolistic behaviour. It has led to the requirement of the government to demonstrate harm to both buyers as well as sellers in a single market. The Department of Justice, however, sticks to their argument that the three separate markets identified by them constitute different areas where the dominance of Google has stifled competition.
