The Google Adtech antitrust case is about to be heard: Analysis of the key points of the court’s offense and defense

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) ruled against Google’s search advertising monopoly case last month. The lawsuit was hailed as a major punishment by the U.S. judiciary against the technology industry’s monopoly market. The court found that Google violated the Sherman Antitrust Act's prohibition on commercial monopolies. The court ruling claimed that Google deliberately created obstacles due to its position as the leading search engine, and held that keywords entered by ordinary people when searching online should not be placed in text ads in search results. After the verdict, Kent Walker, general manager of Google's global affairs group, said that the verdict was equivalent to affirming Google's search engine optimization products and that Google would appeal again.

Google's misfortune is not over yet. Another Google Adtech advertising monopoly case is about to be heard on September 9. The offensive and defensive battle between Google and the Department of Justice has two main points. The court believes that Google has technically kidnapped advertisers and consumers. Google is Prioritize customer experience as the main rebuttal.

The Justice Department and state attorneys general told a Washington District Court judge that Google violated fair competition by entering into exclusive contractual agreements with mobile phone manufacturers and browser companies to make its search engine the default engine for consumers. It is trying to focus on "optimizing consumer experience" and "supporting creators" as the key points of attack and defense.

Binding of mobile phones and browsers to Google and disputes over violation of fair competition

Google dominates almost all of the U.S. online search market. The web version has 87% of the market share, while rivals Microsoft's Bing only accounts for 7.2% and Yahoo only accounts for 2.4%. In terms of mobile device search market share, Google even dominates 95%.

The court held that Google paid Apple, browser vendors and mobile phone operators to pre-install Google applications on their systems and even made them the default browser, leaving consumers unable to choose other browsers. This move was unfair to consumers. harm.

Google and Microsoft cannot interoperate with each other. This business practice prevents its competitors such as Microsoft's Bing from being purchased by advertising agencies for online advertising, which violates the antitrust provisions of fair commercial competition. Google's monopoly creates a huge obstacle for advertising agencies, depriving advertisers of the choice to allocate advertising, so that they can only advertise on Google.

Experts think how to define "market monopoly" as a possible focus of attack and defense

The focus of the court is the battle between Google and its main competitor Microsoft's Bing as the main evidence. However, at the same time, the search engines on many other websites are not linked to Google, such as the search results of the Amazon shopping website or the food website Yelp. wait. Kent Walker said that when people shop online, they usually start searching for products on Amazon.

Bill Kovacic, an antitrust professor at George Washington University and former chairman of the Federal Trade Commission, said that the court believes that Google has the ability to actually monopolize the market, but Google can argue that this is the personal usage habits of consumers, and Google only wants to provide customers with good services. experience.

Justice Department accuses Google of monopolizing ad purchasing resources

Google acquired DoubleClick advertising company in 2008, and the U.S. Department of Justice is preparing to subpoena YouTube CEO Neal Mohan to testify. Mohan was once a vice president of DoubleClick. DoubleClick's most well-known tool is the cookie, which places cookie tracking in Internet visitors' browsers to serve ads. Now Google is de-branding DoubleClick and replacing it with Google Ad Manager. The Department of Justice believes that GAM forces advertisers to use its platform and technology to purchase online advertising and monopolizes advertisers’ advertising funds.

Key points of Google’s offense and defense: “AI Optimization of User Experience Theory”

Google's latest AI Tool function provides answers (results) after the results of keyword searches entered by users are analyzed by artificial intelligence. Google uses artificial intelligence and user experience as its court offensive and defensive strategies. Asking user questions and optimizing search results will improve the user experience. Microsoft's Bing's Copilot also has the same and similar functions. But AI-driven search results could turn into another disaster, with advertisers unable to effectively expose their ads online.

Whose pocket does the money go into? Google's monopoly case has a lot of implications. In terms of advertising revenue, Google is the winner, and other companies can only watch helplessly as Google is dominated by one party. The most hurtful ones are the advertisers who have small advertising budgets and cannot see the expected results, and then there are the middlemen. The advertising agencies who earn advertising purchases cannot earn enough service fees from the advertising purchases. As for whether users get a better experience? With ChatGPT, it has threatened Google's survival. Users can skip the system's default sponsored ads and see various content directly. Is Google going to pay a lot of money to the US government? There will be follow-up reports after the court session tomorrow.

This article Google Adtech antitrust case is about to go to trial: analyzing the key points of the court’s offense and defense. It first appeared on Lian News ABMedia.