![]() The three monopolization-related claims are built on overlapping allegations of unjustified exclusionary conduct by Google. The DOJ must show improper exclusion or, for the tying claim, conditioned sale of products with separate consumer demand. Of course, monopolization does not stop there as a theory. The latter depends on establishing that publisher ad servers or ad exchanges are relevant product markets without reasonable substitutes, that Google has a high market share, and that entry would be difficult, costly, or time-consuming. While the ad tech stack as a factual matter may be unfamiliar to those outside the online advertising world, the analysis is well-established and straightforward: market power can be shown either directly or, more likely in this case, indirectly. In fact, the legal theory behind the DOJ’s lawsuit against Google is well-established.Īs background, it’s worth noting that the DOJ is really positing four substantive antitrust violations: 1) that Google has monopolized the publisher ad server market in violation of Sherman Act Section 2 2) that Google has either monopolized or attempted to monopolize the ad exchange market in violation of Section 2 3) that Google has monopolized the advertiser ad network market in violation of Section 2 and 4) that Google has unlawfully tied its ad exchange (AdX) to its publisher ad server-known as DoubleClick for Publishers or “DFP”-in violation of Sections 1 and 2.Īll four accusations depend on showing that Google has monopoly power (or for tying, significant market power) in the publisher-side ad server market, the advertiser-side ad network market, and/or the ad exchange market where these two sides meet. Whether the DOJ eventually does bring such boundary-testing cases, the Google Ad Tech Stack case is not one of them. The case comes in the wake of critics expressing concern that Biden Administration antitrust officials would bring antitrust cases based on novel or untested legal theories. ![]() The suit’s focus on the “Ad Tech Stack” is novel, and, before the FTC’s 2020 suit against Facebook and its parent company, Meta, the DOJ’s prayer for relief in the form of divestiture and its filing of a Sherman Act Section 2) claim-monopolization and attempted monopolization-would have been fairly novel, at least for the government. Department of Justice jointly filed a lawsuit against Google for monopolization, attempted monopolization, and tying in the digital advertising market. ![]() Some commentators have expressed concerns that the government would make its case using novel and untested legal models, but Salil Mehra writes that these concerns are misplaced and that the case will be primarily argued using traditional antitrust law. Department of Justice and eight states recently sued Google, claiming it runs its digital ad business to unfairly advantage its own business, to the detriment of its customers and potential rivals.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |