Create Account
Google has found itself in hot water this year, and the punches keep coming. Hundreds of entities have lined up to sue the tech giant over the years, but a hit finally landed when a federal judge ruled Google a monopoly in September of this year. Further lawsuits have followed, and advertisers await with baited breath to see what comes of all this. Let’s do a quick check-in on the two major cases the Department of Justice has filed against Google and Alphabet.
The Search Case: Will Google Sell Chrome?
In August 2024, the court ruled Google a monopoly on two counts related to their Search services, and the industry has been anxious to see what the court will do in response. In October, the DOJ presented a 32-page document outlining the types of remedies they’ll seek to limit Google’s power in the search market. Remedies are broken down into 4 categories:
Search Distribution and Revenue Sharing
This refers to actions making it harder for Google to become the default search engine on devices. This includes limiting exclusive or default search deals, requiring Android devices to allow users to pick their default browser, or potentially selling Google Chrome.
Selling Chrome would allow the service to remain the default on Android and other devices without the benefits going to Google. Yes, it is as crazy as it sounds and seems extremely unlikely to actually take place; we’re more likely to see new legislation on partnerships between tech companies and device manufacturers.
Accumulation and Use of Data
The DOJ wants Google to be more transparent on how it collects and implements data. This could include full transparency on how search results and ads on the page are chosen and ranked.
The DOJ has suggested that Google should be more open with consumer data on their advertising platforms. If there is any data that Google is not willing to share due to “privacy concerns”, then they shouldn’t be allowed to use it at all.
Generation and Display of Search Results
Google has employed contracts to limit certain web content to Google search specifically, meaning they never appear on a competitive search engine. The DOJ has suggested limitations or bans for such agreements.
Google has also been experimenting with AI-generated summaries for search content, presumably to help users find useful information quicker. As it stands, Google’s AI can search and pull data from any website that might appear in the search results page. One possible remedy would be to allow any website to opt-out of inclusion of Google’s AI search summaries OR training.
Advertising Scale and Monetization
Finally, the DOJ wants to create a lower barrier to entry for advertising platforms hoping to get in on the game. This could include limiting the use of AI-generation in text advertising, as well as requirements for detailed reports regarding why advertisers did or did not win their bids.
Once again, this is just the framework for what the DOJ would like to see from Google; ultimately the judge will determine what remedies are appropriate for the situation. Google of course has called out the document as unreasonable and way over-reaching in what the government is allowed to change.
A hearing to discGoogle argues that it holds something closer to 10% of the market, that it faces stiff competition on all frontsuss remedy specifics is due to take place in April 2025, and the judge plans to present a ruling in August 2025. That ruling and those remedies will surely be appealed, dragging out the case even longer. Google may have been ruled a monopoly, but we are still potentially years away from the implementation of any serious changes.
The Adtech Case: Closing Arguments
On November 25th, the DOJ and Google reappeared before the judge to tie a bow on their cases for the Adtech antitrust suit. While neither party had much new to say, both statements delivered an excellent recap on their perspectives.
The DOJ reiterated their argument that Google controls 91% of publisher ad servers and 87% of advertiser ad networks through not one, but three distinct monopolies. Beyond market dominance, the DOJ alleges that Google has used a variety of adtech tools to maintain their position and strong-arm advertisers and publishers into using their system. The DOJ particularly notes Doubleclick For Publishers and Google Ad Exchange, or AdX, as the main channels through which the tech giant enforces its control.
Google’s counterargument was one of definitions; they argue that the DOJ’s focus on what they call “open web display advertising” is a loose definition at best that focuses too closely on a small part of a much bigger and broad market. Google argues that it holds something closer to 10% of the market, that it faces stiff competition on all fronts, and that it would be ridiculous to force Google to create favorable conditions for competitors.
Of greater note was the increased participation of the presiding judge, District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema, who has clearly been doing her homework. Brinkema pushed back on each sides’ arguments with questions of her own that demonstrated her clear understanding of the industry and situation. Whatever the outcome of the trial, it will be ruled by a judge who has all the facts.
The Advertising Future is Bright
Google is a big name in advertising with fingers in a lot of markets, but they aren’t everything. There are countless means and channels to bring your message to your future clients, of which Google is only one! A good programmatic platform will give you access to all of them, and that is exactly what Genius Monkey has built its name on.
We get your advertisements in front of your target audience with industry-leading precision and tracking, letting you see the entire journey from initial impression to conversion. Are you ready to increase your conversions and lower your costs? Get in touch with the Genius Monkeys today!
