(Vmeetsolutions News) — The US Justice Department asked a federal judge on Friday to force Alphabet Inc.’s Google to sell key parts of its advertising technology and share realtime data with competitors to address a ruling that the technology giant illegally monopolizes much of the market for placing ads around the web.
The government has requested that the firm dispose of the software utilized by sites for advertising sales, referred to as a publisher ad server, along with the platform used to connect advertisers and publishers in the market for online display advertisements. The Department of Justice advocated for a step-by-step strategy, starting with mandating Google to share instantaneous bidding information from its ad exchange with rival publisher ad servers.
On Friday, during a hearing about Google’s advertising activities in a Virginia courtroom, the Department of Justice submitted this request. Additionally, the government is currently engaged in a different lawsuit against the corporation in Washington, which centers on Google’s supremacy in search engines.
US District Judge Leonie Brinkema, overseeing the case, has scheduled September 22 for hearing suggestions aimed at tackling the competitive issues identified within Google’s advertising operations. The parties involved must present comprehensive proposals by May 5.
Brinkema appeared skeptical that there was a need for Google to sell the ad server, which was developed out of its 2008 purchase of DoubleClick. The judge asked several times during the hearing whether a sale of the advertising exchange, along with the bid data sharing, would address her ruling that Google acted anticompetitively.
Google and the government mostly agreed on giving immediate access to real-time data, however, the company resisted the demand for any asset sales, deeming them impractical and disturbing.
Revenue from Google’s network business, in which it serves up ads on other parts of the Internet, have been declining in recent quarters, suggesting the business may be of diminishing importance to the tech giant going forward.
The Justice Department told Brinkema that the divestitures are essential to ensure Google doesn’t revert to illegal conduct in the future. The government said it’s hard to anticipate every way “a recidivist monopolist like Google” will try to dominate a market, DOJ attorney Julia Tarver Wood told the court.
“Following today’s proceedings, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president for regulatory affairs, stated: ‘The DOJ acknowledged during the hearing that Google’s suggested advertising technology solution adequately complies with the court’s ruling regarding liabilities.’ She further noted, ‘Additional demands from the DOJ aimed at making us separate our ad tech services exceed what was established by the court, lack legal foundation, and could adversely impact both publishers and advertisers.’”
A month ago, Judge Brinkema determined that Google breached antitrust laws within the realms of advertising exchanges and technologies employed by websites to offer ad spaces, referred to as ad servers. However, she stated that the corporation did not fit the criteria for having a monopoly in another sector: software utilized by marketers to purchase visual advertisements. Additionally, she concluded that Google improperly mandated website owners to utilize its ad serving platform should they wish to enjoy all perks associated with their advertising exchange services.
Judge Brinkema’s verdict indicated that this was the second occasion within twelve months where a judicial body determined Google to be operating as an unlawful monopoly. Last month saw the commencement of a legal proceeding in Washington aimed at resolving a decree which stated that the corporation dominates the internet search sector. As part of their efforts, the Justice Department is advocating for measures including forcing Alphabet to divest itself of ownership over the Chrome web browser.
Brinkema’s ruling, however, could make divestitures a tough sell in her case, since she found that a pair of Google acquisitions — DoubleClick in 2008 and AdMeld in 2011 — weren’t anticompetitive on their own, despite DOJ arguments to the contrary. Those two companies comprise key parts of the publisher-side software the DOJ wants Google to sell.
Google is seizing upon part of Brinkema’s decision to contest any asset sales whatsoever. Additionally, Google asserts that its ad exchange plays a significantly wider role beyond just managing “open-web display advertising” as discussed in the case, since it encompasses mobile and video advertisements too—suggesting that such a divestiture would extend well beyond what the court permits.
During the hearing, Brinkema encouraged both the DOJ and Google to resolve the case through mediation, highlighting fast-paced advancements in technology such as AI along with shifts in politics and economics. She suggested that considering “a mediator” might be wise due to these factors.
(Revisions from the second paragraph incorporating specifics from the hearing.)
Top Reads from Vmeetsolutions News
- New York CityLost $9 Billion in Income to Miami and Palm Beach Over Five Years
- New Jersey Transit Appeals to Commuters for Remote Work If Union Goes On Strike
- The Conflict Over the Future of Detroit’s Renaissance Center
- New York City’s Real Estate Sector Seeks Court Injunction Against Upcoming Broker Fee Legislation
- NJ Transit Strike Would Be ‘Catastrophe’ for Area, Sherrill States
©2025 Vmeetsolutions NewsL.P.