"For Google antagonists and ad tech competitors who want the Department of Justice to get its wish list of remedies, the vibe shift in the case is ... not good. The DOJ may have bitten off more than it can chew in calling for a prolonged divestiture process (its own proposal features a timeline that stretches 14 years), and court watchers felt Judge Brinkema was skeptical of removing a free, easy solution, if a replacement includes any costs or engineering know-how to switch."
"Judge Brinkema pressed expert witnesses like Kevel CEO James Avery and Harvard economist Robin Lee about whether any acquirer of Google' ad server or exchange could offer the same products for free, as Google does. Wouldn't any baseline costs for introduced for those products represent a burden on small businesses and publishers? She also asked why Google wouldn't, say, offer vouchers to advertisers to run on its owned-and-operated properties at a discount"
The remedies phase lasted 11 days and clarified Judge Leonie Brinkema's focus on practical, low-cost solutions. The DOJ sought a prolonged divestiture with a timeline stretching 14 years. The judge expressed skepticism about replacing Google's free ad products if acquirers would charge baseline costs, potentially burdening small businesses and publishers. She probed whether Google could shift spend to owned-and-operated properties or use vouchers instead of open-web ads. Experts explained nuances of ad tech, noting Google's large marketing budgets and that a DSP would not simply abandon open-web buying out of spite. The judge weighed feasibility and consumer impact in remedies.
Read at AdExchanger
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]