Google on Friday Facted a Demand by the US government to break up its hugly profitable ad technology business. The request came after a judge found the tech giant was commanding an illegal monopoly for the second time in less than a year.
“We have a Defendant who has found ways to defy” the law, us government law Julia tarver wood told a federal court in Virginia, as she urged the judge to dismiss Google the thing Change Its Behavior. “Lending a recridivist monopolist” intact was not approves to solve the issue, she added.
The demand is the second such request by the US government, which is also called for the Divestment of the Company’s Chrome Browser in a Separate Case Over Google’s World-LADING SEARCHNE BUSINESS.
The US government specifically alleged that google controls the market for publishing banner ads on websites, include of many creatures and small news provides.
The hearing in a virginia course was scheduled to plan out the second phase of the trial, set for September, in which the parties will argue over how to fix the ad market to satisfy the Judge’s Ruling.
The plaintiffs argued in the first phase of the trial last year that the vast majority of websites use google ad software products which, combined, leave no Way for publishers to escale’i’i’Sle’Cow Advertising Technology and Pricing.
after newsletter promotion
The District Court Judge Leonkema Agreed with Most of that Reasoning, RULING LAST MONTH that Google Built An Illegal Monopoly Over Ad Software and tools Used by PUBLILISEDES, BUT PARTILISSESS, but Partialism The argument related to tools used by advertisers.
The us government said it would use the trial to recommend that google short spin off its ad publisher and exchanges operations, as Google Could not be trusted to change its.
“Behavioral remedies are not sufficient because you can’t prevent google from finding a new way to dominate,” Tarver Wood Said.
Google counned that it would recommend that it agre to a binding commission that it would share information with advertisers and publicres on its ad tech platforms. Google Lawyer Karen Dunn Did, however, Acknowledge the “Trust Issues” Raised In the Case and Said the Company would be accepted monitoring to guarantee any commitments made to satisfy the Judge. Google is also arguing that calls for Divestment are not approve in this case, which brinkema swiftly refused as an argument.
The Judge Urged Both Sides to Media, Stressing that Comeing to a Compromise Solution would be cost-effective and more efficient than a week a week-long trial.
