Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

DoJ Wins Another Victory: Google's Ad Tech Empire Violates Antitrust Laws

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,465
37,705


Google has an illegal monopoly in online advertising, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said today. Google is guilty of "willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power" in the publisher ad server market that websites use for ads and the open-web display ad exchange market that matches advertisers with websites.

Google-Logo-Feature-Slack.jpg

Publishers that wanted to use Google's ad exchange were also required to use its ad server, which disadvantaged competing platforms. Google's "First Look" feature gave its ad exchange the first right of refusal for impressions, and "Last Look" let its platform assess bids from competitors before making its own bid.

Google later rolled out Unified Pricing Rules limiting the pricing strategies that publishers used to reduce dependence on Google ads and screen out low-quality content, which the court says favored Google's ad tech growth while harming rival ad tech products. Google's scale and "vast repositories" of data about advertisers, publishers, and users limits competition.

According to the court, Google's actions have resulted in significant harm to advertisers, publishers, and consumers.

Google could be required to divest its publisher ad server and exchange products, make changes to how it operates to prevent anticompetitive practices in the future, and pay fines. The court plans to decide on appropriate remedies at a future hearing.

Today's antitrust ruling comes as Google gears up to face off with the U.S. Department of Justice over its online search monopoly. The DoJ plans to push for Google to sell off its Chrome browser.

Article Link: DoJ Wins Another Victory: Google's Ad Tech Empire Violates Antitrust Laws
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2025/04/17/google-ad-tech-antitrust-ruling/
Google ads are over the top. They are everywhere. If one is good, twenty are better.
I don't have ad block for my tablets. Funny how the mobile versions of Chrome don't allow ad block.
Yes, people have the right to income but some sites are impossible to enjoy with chronic ads jumping around on the screen.
The problem is not the Chrome browser, it is the ads placed by Google. They have made YouTube a mess.
It is my opinion websites go for the easy way to acquire revenue from Google ads by allowing permission.
Looks like there are no restrictions to what Google can do.
We need to regulate when people are not responsible for doing the right thing.
With YouTube, I get a message claiming blocking ads violates their usage rights.
Remember when it was free to use and upload to?
Google has turned it into a huge money maker, even putting ads in the middle of a video.
I doubt the owner of the video can do anything about it.
That should be the issue for the Government to consider.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: gusmula, cicalinarrot, westernsky1 and 8 others
HouseLannister said:
US gov thinks Google is too big and wants them to sell off pieces of the company. Won't that just make Apple look too big and forced to do the same in a few years? Especially if they have a browser and Google doesn't because they had to sell off Chrome.
Click to expand...
I don’t think so because Apple’s growth has come from developing new products rather than acquiring competitors but they will continue to face problems with the AppStore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fzJNotIBOxgnbqejSeVCvJScL, CarlJ, CatalinApple and 4 others
Everybody has to step up their bribing game. What's wrong with them? As someone else said, it's a subscription model now. I wonder where they learned that from?
 
HouseLannister said:
Because the ads and the browser are made by the same company. Switch to a browser that does have adblocking or employ a DNS-level adblocker.
Click to expand...
I have ad block for Chrome for Windows. I have iPad/Android/Windows and need to sync bookmarks.
Chrome works the best for all devices.
I am dialed into the Google ecosystem.
Both my 2019 iPad and 2014 PC need to retire. Both are being forced into it.
That will likely put me into a Chromebox PC and a Chromebook convertible tablet.
Almost everyone makes browsers that are cross platform but Apple.
The DuckDuckGo browser is not available with Linux.
I would deeply consider the Safari browser but it is only for Apple.
Chrome OS is all I need so why invest in Apple products unnecessarily?
The Edge browser might even be an option for Linux, plus everyone else.
I don't plan to go Linux. Above my skillset.
With Edge you get both Google ads and Microsoft's chronic tracking.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: fzJNotIBOxgnbqejSeVCvJScL and HazeAndHahmahneez
HouseLannister said:
US gov thinks Google is too big and wants them to sell off pieces of the company. Won't that just make Apple look too big and forced to do the same in a few years? Especially if they have a browser and Google doesn't because they had to sell off Chrome.
Click to expand...
Perhaps to the unaided eye these look similar based on market value. But, if you look at the differences in the business itself, Apple does not have a monopoly in any area. Google has built a monopoly in the online advertising business through acquisition and unfair practices. That is what the judge’s ruling is about. I don’t think there is a single area in which Apple has shown such behavior. And, no, building a closed ecosystem isn’t the same since there are products and ecosystems that compete effectively.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: gusmula, fzJNotIBOxgnbqejSeVCvJScL, CarlJ and 3 others
vantelimus said:
Apple does not have a monopoly in any area.
Click to expand...

But in a few years they very well could be.

In the US, iPhone has a 57.68% market share. It's a duopoly that is very close to a tipping point. Let's say Google has to sell off Chrome and parts of their ad business. (The DoJ also said they might have to sell off Android if Chrome alone didn't do the trick.) And they have already cut jobs this year in Android/Pixel. If Google is making less money and has less people working on Android/Pixel, the quality goes down and the market share continues to swing in Apple's favor. When does the DoJ say Apple has too big a share in mobile? The EU is already getting into Apple's business in a big way and it is only a matter of time until the US does the same.

explodingtopics.com

iPhone vs Android User Stats (2025 Data)

How are iPhone and Android users different? This report compares iPhone and Android’s market share, user demographics, user loyalty, app downloads, and revenue.
explodingtopics.com explodingtopics.com
 
  • Wow
Reactions: gusmula
HouseLannister said:
US gov thinks Google is too big and wants them to sell off pieces of the company. Won't that just make Apple look too big and forced to do the same in a few years? Especially if they have a browser and Google doesn't because they had to sell off Chrome.
Click to expand...
I liked this because I agree. Apple is not too big like Google. Selling Chrome will not matter to their ad business.
People who aren't Apple customers are not impacted by the company, right?
Microsoft is the one to pay attention to again. They are doing what they did before with Internet Explorer versus Netscape.
 
Imagine a world in which advertisements were not pinned to surveillance capitalism of you, unless you asked for that without coercion.

In any case, the law is the law. Monopolies are illegal. They cause market failures. One of my parents was a DoJ antitrust lawyer, so I have to say I find it gratifying when DoJ catches a huge company cheating. I wonder if Google will be forced to allow different advertising services on its search site, basically breaking the automatic link between Google search and Google advertisements. I also wonder if Amazon's 'featured products' are next.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back