Google’s Web Monopoly Days May Be Numbered

Google Abused It Dominance to Suppress Competition in Some Digital Advertising Markets, A Court Has Found in A Ruling that Could Cold Lead to The Tech Giant Being Forced Toff Parts of Parts of ITS.

Us District Judge Leonie Brinkema Concluded on Thursday that Google Violated Antititit Laws to Build and Illgly Maintain A Monopoly Over The Technology That Intener. For Over A Decade, The Company Imposed Anticompetitive Policies on Customers and Eliminated Desirable Features in Ways that Ultimately DEPRIEDED RIVALS OF THE ABITY.

“This Exclusion Conduct Substantally Harmed Google’s Publisher Customers, The Competitive Process, and, Ultimately, Consumers of Information on The Open Web, Writes Brinkema.

The NEXT STEP: Exploring the Conditions that Should be Imposed on Google in Light of the Ruling. The Government and A Group of States Argue that the Alphabet-Broken Should Be Broken Up, Pointing to It ITS Advertising Products that Help Ad Firms Buy Ads on the Web. Google Made $ 209 Billion in Ad Sales in 2021, Accounting for 81 Percent of Its Revenue. Meta, The Second-Largest Ad Company, Made $ 115 Billion in Ad Revenue That Year.

“We Won Half of this Case and We Will Appeal the Other Half,” Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland Said in A Statement.

Another Federal Judge Found Last Year That Google English in Anticompetitive Conduct by Building A MOAT AOUND ITS MONOPOLY Over Search, Saying that Customers Got A Lower-Buality. The Court Cited Google’s Exclusive Deals with Other Companies, Like Apple and Samsung, to have it Search Engine as the default on their Phones and Browsers. In 2023, It Was Also Found That Google Has An Illegal Monopoly Over Its App Store.

The Rulings Can Have A Sweeping Impact on the Digital Ad Market and the Way in a Wich People Find Information on the Web.

In a mixed ruling, the court Sides Sides the Government on Claims that Google Has an Illegal Monopoly over the toots used by the online publichers to host ads and the software that fathates. IT DISMISISSED A CLAIM CONCERNING THE TOOLS USED BY Advertisers to Buy ADS.

“Google Has Tied ITS PUBLISHER AD SERver and ad exchange together througHh Contractual Policies and Technological Integration, WHICH Enabled The Company to Establish and Protect. Brinkema writes. “Google Further Entrenched ITS Monopoly Power by Imposing Anticompetitive Policies on It Customers and Eliminating Desirable Product Features.”

A Primary Point of Contention in the Case Was Google’s Position As A NECCESARY MIDDLEMAN BETWEEN Advertisers and Publishers, WHICH ALLOWED IT TO LOCK OUT RIVALS THRUGH ITS. The court agreed with the government that the company Limited WHERE AND HOW MUCH OF Other Ad tech providers competed. Notably, Google Made Google Ads’ Demands Available Only to Publishers Through ITS PUBLISHER AD SERver.

Google Maintained that somes of it policies enhanced safety and privacy, Counted Fraud and Decreased Prices, Among Other Things.

The Government Took AIM at An Allegedly Anticompetic Acquisition School Employed by Google To Monopolize the Adverting Market. It Referenified the Company’s Purchase of Doubleclick, Whosh Had the Industry-Leting Publisher Ad Server at the Time of Its Purchase in 2007, for $ 3.1 Billion. The Deal Provided Google With Direct Access to Website Publishers, Incling their Advtonory, In Addition to A Significant Presence with Advertisers, Accounting To The Suit.

The Court Said That Government Failed to Prove Those Purchases Were Anticompetitive. “ALTHOUGH THESE ACQUISSIONS HELPED Google Gain Monopoly Power in Two Adjacant Ad Tech Markets, They Are Insufficient, When Viewed In Isalation, To Prove that Google Acquield Orie OR. Exclusionary Practices, ”the Order States.

The Justice Department Didn’t ImmediaTely Offer Comment.