In a significant ruling, Judge Brinkema found that Google engaged in anticompetitive practices that adversely affected publishers, the competitive landscape, and consumers on the open web. However, the DOJ was unable to establish that Google held a monopoly in specific ad networks and did not impose sanctions for the deletion of chat histories relevant to the case. Googleâs executives claimed they acted within lawful bounds, expressing intent to appeal the decision regarding publisher tools while celebrating victories related to their advertising tools.
Ultimately, Brinkema found that Google's anticompetitive acts substantially harmed 'Google's publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web.'
While the DOJ largely claims the win, Google is apparently not considering this a loss yet. In a statement provided to Ars, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, confirmed that Google plans to appeal.
The Court found that our advertiser tools and our acquisitions, such as DoubleClick, don't harm competition. We disagree with the Court's decision regarding our publisher tools.
As in Google Search, the Court's decision not to sanction 'should not be understood as condoning Google's failure to preserve chat evidence.'
Chat deletions occurred when employees discussed substantive topics at issue in this litigation and continued after the federal government began an antitrust investigation into Google's conduct.
Collection
[
|
...
]