US DoJ wants Google to sell two of its ad products
The DOJ's filing notes that Google should divest its ad exchange product AdX, along with a 'phased' sale of DoubleClick for Publishers, an ad server for website publishers. The department also wants Google to avoid running an ad exchange for 10 years post the sale of AdX.
The DOJ alleged Google had 'ensured that publishers would lose significant revenue if they did not use AdX.' It also accused the search giant of creating a monopoly by integrating AdX and DFP, forcing websites to use Google's publisher product.
The proposal also directed Google to open up its ad buying tools, including AdWords, and have them work with all third-party ad tech products 'on non-discriminatory terms with respect to bidding, matching, placement of ads, or provision of information, except at the express instruction of an advertiser.'
'This comprehensive set of remedies—including divestiture of Google's unlawfully obtained monopolies and the products that were the principal instruments of Google's illegal scheme—is necessary to terminate Google's monopolies, deny Google the fruits of its violations, reintroduce competition into the ad exchange and publisher ad server markets, and guard against reoccurrence in the future,' the filing said.
In response to these proposals, Google's VP of regulatory affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, said that the measures would harm publishers and advertisers.
'The DOJ conceded Google's proposed ad tech remedy fully addresses the Court's decision on liability. The DOJ's additional proposals to force a divestiture of our ad tech tools go well beyond the Court's findings, have no basis in law, and would harm publishers and advertisers,' Mulholland said in a statement.
Techcrunch event
Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you've built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last.
Exhibit at TechCrunch Sessions: AI Secure your spot at TC Sessions: AI and show 1,200+ decision-makers what you've built — without the big spend. Available through May 9 or while tables last.
Berkeley, CA
|
BOOK NOW
Google proposed its own set of remedies in a separate filing. These include making AdX real-time bids available to all third-party ad servers, and keeping Google's actions under an independent compliance observer for three years.
Google is fighting antitrust pressure from several directions. Separate from the ad tech case, the U.S. also wants the company to sell its Chrome browser after a judge found the company to be a monopoly in the online search market.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
Big Tech Pledged Billions for New Housing. The Results Aren't Living Up to the Hype.
Tech giants Meta, Google and Apple made headlines when they pledged billions of dollars to make housing more affordable in their Silicon Valley backyards. Now, six years later, the results haven't lived up to expectations.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Could the Supreme Court overturn same-sex marriage? This case hopes to roll back the ruling that made it legal.
Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who was jailed after refusing to file marriage licenses for same-sex couples, is hoping to overturn the Obergefell v. Hodges decision. The Supreme Court is being asked to hear a case that seeks to undo the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which allowed same-sex couples to get married. This challenge of Obergefell, the first since 2015, comes from Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who was jailed in 2015 after being held in contempt for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Davis, who refused to file the marriage licenses due to her religious beliefs, is appealing a damages verdict against her: a $100,000 jury verdict for emotional damages plus $260,000 for attorneys' fees. Now she is taking her case to the Supreme Court on the grounds that Obergefell was wrongly decided and infringes on her First Amendment rights. This is not the first time Davis has attempted to overturn the damages against her. In 2019, she petitioned the Supreme Court to dismiss the lawsuit, but the court declined to hear her case. More recently, in 2025, a panel of judges from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals also rejected her claims. Davis's challenge is concerning to LGBTQ advocates, as overturning Obergefell could undo the legal right to same-sex marriage. That 2015 ruling stated that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry and that all states must recognize those marriages. At the time, Davis's court battle was a direct challenge to Obergefell — but the ruling held. But now Liberty Counsel, the conservative group representing Davis, is asking the Supreme Court to overturn both the Sixth Circuit decision and the Supreme Court's initial decision in Obergefell. Mat Staver, Liberty Counsel's founder and chair, stated that Davis's case 'underscores why the U.S. Supreme Court should overturn the wrongly decided Obergefell v. Hodges opinion, because it threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred union between one man and one woman.' Could same-sex marriage really be overturned? What would that mean? The new makeup of the Supreme Court could favor Davis. Since 2015, the Supreme Court has become more conservative, with three justices — Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — appointed by President Trump during his first term. While this does not necessarily mean the conservative majority would rule in Davis's favor, should the court choose to take her case, the latest request sounded alarm bells for many LGBTQ advocates. And there is recent precedent for overturning previously decided court cases. For example, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, ending federal protection for abortion rights after nearly 50 years. In his concurring opinion of the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson decision, which overturned Roe, Justice Clarence Thomas stated that the court should reconsider Obergefell and other cases related to rights based on the Constitution's due process clause. Should Obergefell be overturned, 32 states have laws on the books that would ban same-sex marriage — though, thanks to a 2022 federal law, they would still have to recognize unions that were already legally performed. Then-President Joe Biden signed the Respect for Marriage Act, which overturned the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act and ensured federal recognition of same-sex and interracial marriages. However, the law does not force states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
NY judge denies DOJ bid to unseal grand jury records in Ghislaine Maxwell case
NEW YORK — A federal judge in Manhattan on Monday denied a request by the Department of Justice to unseal grand jury records in Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell's case — finding the Trump administration's bid appeared not to be about public transparency but 'the illusion of such.' Federal Judge Paul Engelmayer, in his 31-page opinion, said the DOJ, facing growing turmoil over the decision not to release investigative materials on Epstein, portrayed the sealed records from Maxwell's case as something they were not. 'Contrary to the Government's depiction, the Maxwell grand jury testimony is not a matter of significant historical or public interest. Far from it. It consists of garden-variety summary testimony by two law enforcement agents,' Engelmayer wrote, noting much of what was contained within the agents' testimony was revealed at Maxwell's 2021 trial. The judge said that any members of the public who followed Maxwell's trial, leading to her conviction on sex trafficking charges and a 20-year prison term, would 'learn next to nothing new' from the materials. The records, his order notes, do not identify anyone other than Maxwell and Epstein as having sexually abused a minor. 'They do not discuss or identify any client of Epstein's or Maxwell's. They do not reveal any heretofore unknown means or methods of Epstein's or Maxwell's crimes. They do not reveal new venues at which their crimes occurred,' the judge wrote. 'They do not reveal new sources of their wealth. They do not explore the circumstances of Epstein's death. They do not reveal the path of the Government's investigation.' Grand jury proceedings, in which prosecutors seek to secure an indictment, are confidential. In his blistering opinion, Engelmayer noted that the DOJ had failed to cite a single case in which 'special circumstances' warranted the highly unusual step of unsealing grand jury records because 'there is none,' going on to describe the government's public explanations for trying to make the Maxwell materials public as 'disingenuous.' The government had acknowledged in filings last week that little information from the sealed proceedings would be new to the public. 'A member of the public, appreciating that the Maxwell grand jury materials do not contribute anything to public knowledge, might conclude that the Government's motion for their unsealing was aimed not at 'transparency' but at diversion — aimed not at full disclosure but at the illusion of such,' the judge wrote. Spokespeople for the DOJ did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Manhattan Federal Judge Richard Berman, presiding over Epstein's case, is still mulling a request from the DOJ to unseal the grand jury records in that matter. A judge in Florida last month shot down a similar request by the DOJ surrounding 2005 and 2007 grand jury proceedings relating to Epstein. The Trump administration has failed to contain the growing Epstein scandal after the DOJ and the FBI last month released a joint memo saying they would not publicly release upwards of 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence recovered in Epstein investigations, the so-called 'Epstein files.' The decision led to an uproar from Trump's MAGA supporters, given Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino had hyped up a supposed treasure trove of information on the mysterious money manager who was found dead in a Manhattan jail cell in August 2019 during Trump's first term, around a month after his arrest on sweeping sex trafficking charges and more than a decade after he evaded meaningful accountability in a sweetheart deal with federal prosecutors in Florida. Epstein's death was ultimately ruled a suicide, but conspiracy theories have abounded on account of his connections to some of the world's most powerful people. Trump, who was friends with Epstein for years before a falling-out in the early 2000s, himself stoked conspiracy theories about the Brooklyn-born wealth manager, questioning whether he had actually killed himself in one 2020 interview. While running for reelection last year, Trump told Fox News he would likely declassify the Epstein files. The president has since pulled a 180, chiding his supporters who have called on him to make the records public and accusing Democrats of fabricating an Epstein 'hoax.' Trump's about-face was followed by a set of bombshell exposés published last month by the Wall Street Journal that revealed he had recently learned his name featured multiple times in the Epstein files. The news outlet, owned by longtime Trump ally Rupert Murdoch, also reported that Trump had written a cryptic message to Epstein for the financier's 50th birthday inside a drawing of a naked woman, including the line, 'may every day be another wonderful secret.' Trump has denied the reports and is suing the newspaper. Maxwell's attorney, David Oscar Markus, who could not immediately be reached for comment Monday, had opposed the government's long-shot unsealing request. Last week, he told the court that while Epstein is dead, she is very much still alive and in the midst of asking the Supreme Court to review her appeal of her conviction on charges alleging she procured young girls for Epstein's abuse. Maxwell has long claimed the feds scapegoated her after Epstein's death. Outraging Epstein and Maxwell's victims, the Trump administration's reaction to the scandal has also included Todd Blanche, the deputy Attorney General and Trump's former personal lawyer, twice interviewing the British former socialite in jail. Since those sit-downs last month, Maxwell has been transferred from a Florida prison facility to a cushy dormitory-style prison in Bryan, Texas. Women who were sexually exploited, serially raped, and abused in their youth by Epstein have criticized the Trump administration for putting any faith in Maxwell and accused Trump appointees of treating them as political pawns and sidelining them during the efforts to unseal grand jury materials. In his scathing Monday order, Engelmayer noted the victims' alarm and that none of the prosecutors who worked on the cases against Epstein and Maxwell, 'presumably most familiar' with the materials, had joined in on the unsealing request, but that it was made by Blanche alone 'under circumstances suggestive of haste rather than reflective deliberation.' The judge said that the entire premise of the government's unsealing request — that making the records public would shine a light on Epstein and Maxwell's depravity and the probes into the perverted duo — was 'demonstrably false.' 'Insofar as the motion to unseal implies that the grand jury materials are an untapped mine lode of undisclosed information about Epstein or Maxwell or confederates, they definitively are not that,' the judge wrote, adding anyone deeply interested in the matter who expected to learn something new 'would come away feeling disappointed and misled.' 'There is no 'there' there.' _____
