With the verdict in its search monopoly case now delivered, Google is turning its attention to another major antitrust battle: a DOJ lawsuit challenging its dominance in the advertising technology (ad tech) market. The outcome of the search case could have significant ripple effects on this second, pending legal war.
In the search case, Judge Mehta showed a strong reluctance to impose a structural remedy like a breakup. This could be bad news for the DOJ in the ad tech case, where the government is explicitly asking a different judge to force Google to sell off parts of its ad business. The search ruling sets a precedent that courts may favor less drastic, behavioral remedies.
However, the search ruling also legally established Google as an illegal monopolist. This finding could strengthen the government’s hand in the ad tech case, as it helps establish a pattern of anti-competitive behavior. The DOJ can argue that Google has a proven history of using its power to crush rivals.
The upcoming ad tech trial, set to be heard by Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia, will be a crucial test. Will she follow Judge Mehta’s cautious approach, or will the different facts of the ad tech market lead her to a more aggressive conclusion? The search verdict has raised the stakes and provided new legal ammunition for both sides.
