Google begins its battle for the “informal currency of the Internet”

On Monday, the Ministry of Justice ruled that Google spent a decade to sharpen its “weapons” in an industry that helps to keep large areas of the open Internet. After years of Operating illegal monopoly in the two advertising technology markets And linking its products illegally, there will be no less than the separation from overcoming the “huge start” of Google on competitors, as she claims.

The lawyer of the Ministry of Justice, Julia Tarvar Wood, has started her opening arguments in the trial of treatments for the sake We are against Google AD Tech Case by quoting Winston Churchill warning that “those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.” The government has argued that unless Judge Leonu Brentka divides, the company will definitely find a way to reconfigure its unfair advantages that left the publishers feel that they have no choice but to use its products, even when it decomposes quality. On the other hand, Google’s lawyer Karen Dan has argued that the 61 -page radical proposal is a swing of fences. “

The government specifically requires Google to sell ADX Exchange, which facilitates transactions between publishers who want to sell space on web sites and advertisers who want to market to their fans. The Ministry of Justice also wants to open Google the source of the final auction logic behind the publisher, Doubleclic for publishers (DFP). He argues that he would open indirect thinking behind the reason for some advertising offers to others, which government witnesses have witnessed only only to Google. If it does not do enough to restore competition to the markets, the Ministry of Justice wants to book the court’s option to force it to sell DFP as well.

Google, which is expected to appeal the basic monopoly ruling as soon as the judge issues its opinion on treatments, argued with behavioral changes, such as obligations not to use certain auction tactics, and to provide new ways of products to integrate with competitors and competition. Dan said that Google can complete the artwork to carry out this in just one year, compared to a decade of time for government proposals. Instead of other competitors, Dunn accused, and the government wants to get Google out of the online ads race completely.

Google’s publisher tools are in “The Heart of the Internet”, Andrew Casal, CEO of Exchande Exchande Exchang. Kasal said that the vast majority of American publishers run the area of ​​cross advertisements, and it is a “informal currency of the Internet”, which helps many publishers to maintain the content for free to reach the web.

Earlier this year, BRINKAMA found that Google illegally monopolizes the market for AD publisher servers, where DFP operates, exchange ads, such as ADX. Google also found that these two products illegally linked to benefit from themselves. By effectively imprisoning publishers in its tools, the government said, Google has made that a non -proportional share of money that keeps a lot of the Internet is free for final users through its own tubes.

Google currently practices a lot of control of publishers to the extent that it will not accept any reviews of its tools by the publisher, and the Grant Whitmore, Vice President of Advance Local, who runs local news sites throughout the country. The large and varied advertisers base that publishers cannot access effectively through ADX using ADX using DFP is the most important part of their revenues. “We had to agree on things that we did not agree with with any other provider,” Witzar.

Wittusor would like to see the DFP court immediately, instead of waiting for results from the open sources plan, but he says treatments are a good first step. He said: “Google has shown its ability to adapt their business in a way that constantly gives them an advantage,” and it provides the government’s request for an external monitoring necessary. He added that if Google is allowed to keep all parts of its wing in the field of advertising technology, there will remain a lot of opportunities to “put their thumb on the scale.”

The Ministry of Justice warns that the proposed behavioral reforms of Google leaves a very big room for cheating, allowing it to bury anti -competition behavior in the complex code and mysterious structures for the advertising technology industry. They “love to put first aid on dangerous ends,” Wood said.

Google’s attorneys have argued that the Ministry of Justice overcame its authority, and suggested that its products revolving it may lead to consumer damage and perhaps another concentrated market, under new property.

How to fit the rule of research in

Google has recently discovered a break across the river in Washington, DC, where Judge Amit Mehta She refused to divide the chrome browser In treatments to obtain a research monopoly. (Google previously said it would resume that The basic judgmentAlso.) Wood, the lawyer of the Ministry of Justice, insisted on the facts of the two cases, “unlikely”. Wood, Chrome was not essential in the government’s demand for anti -competition behavior in the event of research, but the illegal procedures for Google in the advertising technology industry were often working on this.

But Google was based on the rule of Mihata in saying that BRINKAMA, too, should exercise restraint in its opinion. Den warned that Mihta confessed to the judicial intervention of risk, could bring in reverse results – after a trial where CEO Sondar Bishi warned Arrogant remedies can kill Google incentives to keep the search engine create and harm user privacy. Brinkma broke a smile when he mocked Dunn, just like the judge who could not ensure that the sound and visual preparation for the court succeeded, Google could not guarantee that its technology would work after the separation.

Artificial intelligence has cast a long shadow if Google searches, but so far, its effect appears limited in this experience. The first two witnesses witnessed that artificial intelligence tools open some innovation categories in the advertising technology industry, but not necessarily change the basic function of the central software advertisement of the issue. However, the government indicated that the Google Advertising Technology Empire gave it an abundance of initial data that operates artificial intelligence systems.

On the contrary, Google will probably argue that the developments of the new industry – including artificial intelligence – will cause a natural shift from the type of advertising in the case, even without the judge’s intervention. Den said in the opening arguments that the open web shows ads have decreased since the government began achieving them several years ago – hesitated. One of the most striking claims In Google’s defense, she initially said that harsh treatments “will accelerate” the ruin of an open network “is already in a rapid decrease. (Google later Correct this deposit To replace the term with the “announcement of the open network display”.

Wood has argued that strong treatments – including separation – are necessary to restore competition to the markets they publish on the Internet. “Without it, your honor, what was everything?”