Analysts: New documents highlight the strength of the DOJ case against Google

The Department of Justice and Google released their proposed “findings of fact and conclusions of law” statements this week, the latest development in the landmark ad tech antitrust trial. Clocking in at a combined 1,187 pages, the documents lay out the main facts from both sides of the case.

These findings serve as a preview of the trial’s closing arguments, which start on Nov. 25. An official ruling from Judge Leonie Brinkema likely won’t come until early next year.

Recapping the findings

According to the filings, the DOJ believes the evidence and testimony from the trial prove Google holds a monopoly of “key digital advertising technologies,” using its dominance so that “all roads lead to Google.”

A key part of the government’s case has been that Google maintained “a trifecta of monopolies” with its publisher ad server Google Ad Manager (formerly known as DFP), ad exchange AdX and advertiser ad network Google Ads. The DOJ believes the evidence shows Google tied real-time bids from AdX to DFP and tied Google Ads to AdX, which increased Google’s dominance in the publisher ad server market and made it impossible for publishers to switch away from DFP.

Google claims that the government misrepresents and misunderstands the digital advertising market, that it didn’t show evidence of monopolistic behavior and that the digital advertising market has plenty of healthy competition.

Ad tech insider reactions

Meanwhile, the documents’ release caused a stir in the ad tech community. Multiple analysts say Google is mischaracterizing the facts and that the DOJ’s brief lays out a clear case. Here are some of their reactions.

“DOJ’s filing was consistent with the trial — simplifying and clarifying, laying out a very clear case for Google’s monopolies and abuses — while reminding the court of Google’s evidence purging. Meanwhile, Google threw more than 700 pages of spaghetti at the wall, attempting to find its defense in rewriting the case as a refusal to deal, two-sided market and questioning the very market itself. Advantage: Department of Justice.” Jason Kint, CEO of Digital Content Next, tells The Current.

“Google opens their revised, over-700-page ‘Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law’ by gaslighting its publisher customers, with a blatant mischaracterization of some of the trial’s most impactful testimony by Stephanie Layser, echoed by Tim Cadogan and Tom Kershaw. According to Google, this “handful” of dissatisfied “rivals” and “mammoth publishers” are upset because they “believe Google’s technology and its customers should be ‘community property.’”  Anyone following the trial closely would know immediately that this is little more than out-of-context distortion, and an incredibly weak way to start their arguments.” Arielle Garcia, director of intelligence at ad-industry watchdog Check My Ads, tells The Current.

“This argument is SO disingenuous. Luckily, on the stand, the judge allowed me to clarify what I meant by community assets. But for the record: I believe we should develop standards together (like ORTB). I believe in publishers controlling ad decisioning and expediting that by making it easy to own an auction between competing ad platforms (Prebid). I also believe in interoperation with open-source frameworks, and have asked and called for an AdX adapter in Prebid, NOT Google contributing the entire functionality of AdX to Prebid. I actually don’t even need them to make an adapter (we can do that ourselves), I just need them to respond from GAM with a price. #adtechsocialist.” Stephanie Layser, global head of publisher ad tech solutions at AWS wrote on LinkedIn. Layser testified during the trial as a former executive at News Corp.

— Vidushi Dyall, director of legal analysis at the Chamber of Progress

— Thomas Höppner, partner at the Hausfeld law firm

“As we look ahead to closing arguments in a couple of weeks, the DOJ’s case is looking stronger than ever,” Garcia adds.

The Current is owned and operated by The Trade Desk Inc. An individual from The Trade Desk was among the 68 people included on the trial witness list.