Judge hears closing arguments on Google ad-tech remedies
After an April ruling that parts of Google's ad‑tech business constitute an illegal monopoly, Judge Leonie Brinkema held an 11‑day remedies trial this fall and heard closing arguments Friday in Alexandria, Virginia, with a ruling expected early next year. The DOJ urged structural divestitures, calling Google a "recidivist monopolist," while Google called such remedies legally unprecedented and risky for a system that handles roughly 55 million ad requests per second, citing AI‑driven market changes as a reason for caution and DOJ witnesses warning about subtle algorithm manipulation; for context, a separate search case saw Judge Amit Mehta reject a proposed Chrome divestiture and order reforms seen as relatively lenient.
📌 Key Facts
- After an April ruling that parts of Google’s ad tech constitute an illegal monopoly, Judge Leonie Brinkema held an 11‑day remedies trial this fall.
- Closing arguments were heard Friday in Alexandria, Virginia; a ruling from Judge Brinkema is expected early next year.
- The DOJ urged structural divestitures, labeling Google a "recidivist monopolist," while Google called the proposal "legally unprecedented" and warned such remedies could jeopardize a system that processes roughly 55 million ad requests per second.
- Google argued that market changes driven by AI counsel caution about drastic remedies; the DOJ emphasized testimony suggesting Google can manipulate ad‑serving algorithms in hard‑to‑detect ways.
- Context: in a related antitrust case over search, Judge Amit Mehta rejected a proposed Chrome divestiture and ordered reforms — an outcome seen as relatively lenient.
📰 Sources (2)
- After an April ruling that parts of Google’s ad tech constitute an illegal monopoly, Judge Leonie Brinkema held an 11‑day remedies trial this fall.
- Closing arguments took place Friday in Alexandria, Virginia; a ruling is expected early next year.
- DOJ is urging structural divestitures, calling Google a "recidivist monopolist"; Google labels the proposal "legally unprecedented" and warns of risks to a system processing ~55 million ad requests per second.
- Google cites market changes from AI as a reason for caution; DOJ emphasizes testimony on Google’s ability to manipulate algorithms in hard‑to‑detect ways.
- Context: In a separate search case, Judge Amit Mehta rejected a proposed Chrome divestiture and ordered reforms, an outcome seen as relatively lenient.