Latest news with #Lee-AnneMulholland
Boston Globe
30-05-2025
- Business
- Boston Globe
Google, Justice Department face off in climactic showdown in search monopoly case
Advertisement Google lawyers are expected to assert only minor concessions are needed, especially as the upheaval triggered by advances in artificial intelligence already are reshaping the search landscape, as alternative, conversational search options are rolling out from AI startups that are hoping to use the Department of Justice's four-and-half-year-old case to gain the upper hand in the next technological frontier. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up 'Over weeks of testimony, we heard from a series of well-funded companies eager to gain access to Google's technology so they don't have to innovate themselves,' Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, wrote in a blog post earlier this month. 'What we didn't hear was how DOJ's extreme proposals would benefit consumers.' After the day-long closing arguments, Mehta will spend much of the summer mulling a decision that he plans to issue before Labor Day. Google has already vowed to appeal the ruling that branded its search engine as a monopoly, a step it can't take until the judge orders a remedy. Advertisement While both sides of this showdown agree that AI is an inflection point for the industry's future, they have disparate views on how the shift will affect Google. The Justice Department contends that AI technology by itself won't rein in Google's power, arguing additional legal restraints must be slapped on a search engine that's the main reason its parent company, Alphabet Inc., is valued at $2 trillion. Google has already been deploying AI to transform its search engine i nto an answer engine, an effort that has so far helped maintain its perch as the internet's main gateway despite inroads being made by alternatives from the likes of OpenAI and Perplexity. The Justice Department contends a divestiture of the Chrome browser that Google CEO Sundar Pichai helped build nearly 20 years ago would be among the most effective countermeasures against Google continuing to amass massive volumes of browser traffic and personal data that could be leveraged to retain its dominance in the AI era. Executives from both OpenAi and Perplexity testified last month that they would be eager bidders for the Chrome browser if Mehta orders its sale. The debate over Google's fate also has pulled in opinions from Apple, mobile app developers, legal scholars and startups. Apple, which collects more than $20 billion annually to make Google the default search engine on the iPhone and its other devices, filed briefs arguing against the Justice Department's proposed 10-year ban on such lucrative lock-in agreements. Apple told the judge that prohibiting the contracts would deprive the company of money that it funnels into its own research, and that the ban might even make Google even more powerful because the company would be able to hold onto its money while consumers would end up choosing its search engine anyway. The Cupertino, California, company also told the judge a ban wouldn't compel it to build its own search engine to compete against Google. Advertisement In other filings, a group of legal scholars said the Justice Department's proposed divestiture of Chrome would be an improper penalty that would inject unwarranted government interference in a company's business. Meanwhile, former Federal Trade Commission officials James Cooper and Andrew Stivers warned that another proposal that would require Google to share its data with rival search engines 'does not account for the expectations users have developed over time regarding the privacy, security, and stewardship' of their personal information. The App Association, a group that represents mostly small software developers, also advised Mehta not to adopt the Justice Department's proposed changes because of the ripple effects they would have across the tech industry. Hobbling Google in the way the Justice Department envisions would make it more difficult for startups to realize their goal of being acquired, the App Association wrote. 'Developers will be overcome by uncertainty' if Google is torn apart, the group argues. Buy Y Combinator, an incubator that has helped create hundreds of startups collectively worth about $800 billion filed documents pushing for the dramatic overhaul of Google, whose immense power has discouraged venture capitalists from investing in areas that are considered to be part of the company's 'kill zone.' Advertisement Startups 'also need to be able to get their products into the hands of users, free from restrictive dealing and self-preferencing that locks up important distribution channels. As things stand, Google has locked up the most critical distribution channels, freezing the general search and search text advertising markets into static competition for more than a decade,' Y Combinator told Mehta.
Int'l Business Times
07-05-2025
- Business
- Int'l Business Times
Google Faces Ad-Tech Breakup as US Targets Illegal Monopoly
The Google logo is seen with the rainbow flag as a symbol of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and queer pride and LGBT social movements in New York City on June 7, 2022. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) is taking major steps to break up part of Google's digital advertising empire after a judge ruled the tech giant held an illegal monopoly in two key ad-tech markets. The DOJ is now urging a federal court to force Google to sell its AdX platform and DFP ad server tools—key technologies that connect advertisers with websites looking to sell ad space. These proposed changes aim to restore fairness and competition in the online ad space. According to the DOJ, Google used its power to control both sides of the digital advertising market—where ads are sold and how they are delivered—leaving publishers and advertisers with fewer choices and higher costs. According to CNBC , US District Judge Leonie Brinkema recently found Google guilty of "willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power" in these markets. The trial to decide Google's punishment is set for September, with a final ruling expected by early next year. — Storyboard18 (@BrandStoryboard) May 7, 2025 Google Warns Ad-Tech Split Would Hurt Internet Users Google strongly opposes the DOJ's demands. The company said that forcing it to sell parts of its ad business would harm advertisers, publishers, and internet users alike. "The DOJ's proposals... have no basis in law and would harm publishers and advertisers," said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's Vice President of Regulatory Affairs. Instead, Google has offered a different solution. It suggested a plan to increase transparency and allow a court-appointed trustee to monitor its behavior for three years. Google argues this would protect competition without needing to break up its business. The DOJ disagrees, saying stronger action is needed, including a 10-year ban on Google from running a digital ad exchange, Inquirer said. The agency wants to ensure the company cannot repeat its past behavior, calling Google a "recidivist monopolist." This isn't the only legal battle Google is facing. In another ongoing case, the DOJ is also trying to separate the company's Chrome browser from its search engine, which another judge ruled was also an illegal monopoly. If the courts approve the DOJ's proposals, it would be the largest US company breakup since AT&T was forced to divide into smaller companies over 40 years ago. Originally published on © {{Year}} All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.
TimesLIVE
06-05-2025
- Business
- TimesLIVE
US seeks break-up of Google's ad-tech products after judge finds illegal monopoly
The US department of justice has proposed Alphabet's Google divest its AdX advertising marketplace and ad server DFP, a court filing showed on Monday, after a federal judge found the company illegally dominated two online ad-tech markets. The judge set a September trial date on Friday after hearing from Google and the justice department on potential remedies for the company's dominance in ad tools used by online publishers. The justice department said the proposed remedies, including divestitures, are necessary to end Google's monopolies and restore competition in the ad-exchange and publisher ad-server markets. Google has said the company supported behavioural remedies such as making real-time bids available to competitors, but prosecutors cannot legally pursue a bid to force it to sell parts of its business. 'The department of justice's additional proposals to force a divestiture of our ad-tech tools go well beyond the court's findings, have no basis in law and would harm publishers and advertisers,' Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, said in a statement to Reuters. AdX, or Ad Exchange, is a marketplace where publishers can make their unsold ad space available to advertisers for purchase on a real-time basis. Publisher ad servers are platforms used by websites to store and manage their digital ad inventory. Along with ad exchanges, the technology lets news publishers and other online content providers make money by selling ads. Last year, Google took a major step to end an EU antitrust investigation with an offer to sell AdX, but European publishers rejected the proposal as insufficient.
TechCrunch
06-05-2025
- Business
- TechCrunch
US DoJ wants Google to sell two of its ad products
The U.S. Department of Justice is proposing that Google sell two of its advertising products to restore competition in the ad tech space, according to a new filing. The proposal comes after a judge found Google guilty of 'willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power' in the digital ad space last month. The DOJ's filing notes that Google should divest its ad exchange product AdX, along with a 'phased' sale of DoubleClick for Publishers, an ad server for website publishers. The department also wants Google to avoid running an ad exchange for 10 years post the sale of AdX. The DOJ alleged Google had 'ensured that publishers would lose significant revenue if they did not use AdX.' It also accused the search giant of creating a monopoly by integrating AdX and DFP, forcing websites to use Google's publisher product. The proposal also directed Google to open up its ad buying tools, including AdWords, and have them work with all third-party ad tech products 'on non-discriminatory terms with respect to bidding, matching, placement of ads, or provision of information, except at the express instruction of an advertiser.' 'This comprehensive set of remedies—including divestiture of Google's unlawfully obtained monopolies and the products that were the principal instruments of Google's illegal scheme—is necessary to terminate Google's monopolies, deny Google the fruits of its violations, reintroduce competition into the ad exchange and publisher ad server markets, and guard against reoccurrence in the future,' the filing said. In response to these proposals, Google's VP of regulatory affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, said that the measures would harm publishers and advertisers. 'The DOJ conceded Google's proposed ad tech remedy fully addresses the Court's decision on liability. The DOJ's additional proposals to force a divestiture of our ad tech tools go well beyond the Court's findings, have no basis in law, and would harm publishers and advertisers,' Mulholland said in a statement. Techcrunch event Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you've built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you've built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last. Berkeley, CA | BOOK NOW Google proposed its own set of remedies in a separate filing. These include making AdX real-time bids available to all third-party ad servers, and keeping Google's actions under an independent compliance observer for three years. Google is fighting antitrust pressure from several directions. Separate from the ad tech case, the U.S. also wants the company to sell its Chrome browser after a judge found the company to be a monopoly in the online search market.
CNBC
06-05-2025
- Business
- CNBC
U.S. seeks breakup of Google's ad-tech products after judge finds illegal monopoly
The U.S. Department of Justice has proposed that Alphabet's Google divest its AdX advertising marketplace and ad server DFP, a court filing showed Monday, after a federal judge found the company illegally dominated two online ad-tech markets. The judge set a September trial date Friday, after hearing from Google and the DOJ on potential remedies for the company's dominance in ad tools used by online publishers. The Justice Department said the proposed remedies, including divestitures, are necessary to end Google's monopolies and restore competition in the ad-exchange and publisher ad-server markets. Google has said the company supported behavioral remedies such as making real-time bids available to competitors, but that prosecutors cannot legally pursue a bid to force it to sell parts of its business. "The DOJ's additional proposals to force a divestiture of our ad tech tools go well beyond the Court's findings, have no basis in law, and would harm publishers and advertisers," Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of Regulatory Affairs, said in a statement to Reuters. AdX, or Ad Exchange, is a marketplace where publishers can make their unsold ad space available to advertisers for purchase on a real-time basis. Publisher ad servers are platforms used by websites to store and manage their digital ad inventory. Along with ad exchanges, the technology lets news publishers and other online content providers make money by selling ads. Last year, Google took a major step to end an EU antitrust investigation with an offer to sell AdX but European publishers rejected the proposal as insufficient.
