عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Technology

Google Holds Illegal Monopolies in Ad Tech, US Judge Finds, Allowing US to Seek Breakup

A man walks past Google's offices in London's Kings Cross area, on Aug. 10, 2024. (AP)
A man walks past Google's offices in London's Kings Cross area, on Aug. 10, 2024. (AP)
TT
20
TT

Google Holds Illegal Monopolies in Ad Tech, US Judge Finds, Allowing US to Seek Breakup

A man walks past Google's offices in London's Kings Cross area, on Aug. 10, 2024. (AP)
A man walks past Google's offices in London's Kings Cross area, on Aug. 10, 2024. (AP)

Alphabet's Google illegally dominated two markets for online advertising technology, a judge ruled on Thursday, dealing another blow to the tech giant and paving the way for US antitrust prosecutors to seek a breakup of its advertising products.

US District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, found Google liable for "willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power" in markets for publisher ad servers and the market for ad exchanges which sit between buyers and sellers. Publisher ad servers are platforms used by websites to store and manage their ad inventory.

Antitrust enforcers failed to prove a separate claim that the company had a monopoly in advertiser ad networks, she wrote.

Lee-Anne Mulholland, vice president of Regulatory Affairs, said Google will appeal the ruling.

"We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half," she said, adding that the company disagrees with the decision on its publisher tools. "Publishers have many options and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable and effective."

Google's shares were down around 2.1% at midday.

The decision clears the way for another hearing to determine what Google must do to restore competition in those markets, such as sell off parts of its business at another trial that has yet to be scheduled.

The DOJ has said that Google should have to sell off at least its Google Ad Manager, which includes the company's publisher ad server and ad exchange.

Google now faces the possibility of two US courts ordering it to sell assets or change its business practices. A judge in Washington will hold a trial next week on the DOJ's request to make Google sell its Chrome browser and take other measures to end its dominance in online search.

Google has previously explored selling off its ad exchange to appease European antitrust regulators, Reuters reported in September.

Brinkema oversaw a three-week trial last year on claims brought by the DOJ and a coalition of states.

Google used classic monopoly-building tactics of eliminating competitors through acquisitions, locking customers in to using its products, and controlling how transactions occurred in the online ad market, prosecutors said at trial.

Google argued the case focused on the past, when the company was still working on making its tools able to connect to competitors' products. Prosecutors also ignored competition from technology companies including Amazon.com and Comcast as digital ad spending shifted to apps and streaming video, Google's lawyer said.

Most Viewed

 
Technology

Justice at Stake as Generative AI Enters the Courtroom

Generative artificial intelligence has been used in the US legal system by judges performing research, lawyers filing appeals and parties involved in cases who wanted help expressing themselves in court. Jefferson Siegel / POOL/AFP
Generative artificial intelligence has been used in the US legal system by judges performing research, lawyers filing appeals and parties involved in cases who wanted help expressing themselves in court. Jefferson Siegel / POOL/AFP
TT
20
TT

Justice at Stake as Generative AI Enters the Courtroom

Generative artificial intelligence has been used in the US legal system by judges performing research, lawyers filing appeals and parties involved in cases who wanted help expressing themselves in court. Jefferson Siegel / POOL/AFP
Generative artificial intelligence has been used in the US legal system by judges performing research, lawyers filing appeals and parties involved in cases who wanted help expressing themselves in court. Jefferson Siegel / POOL/AFP

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is making its way into courts despite early stumbles, raising questions about how it will influence the legal system and justice itself.

Judges use the technology for research, lawyers utilize it for appeals and parties involved in cases have relied on GenAI to help express themselves in court.

"It's probably used more than people expect," said Daniel Linna, a professor at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law, about GenAI in the US legal system.

"Judges don't necessarily raise their hand and talk about this to a whole room of judges, but I have people who come to me afterward and say they are experimenting with it”.

In one prominent instance, GenAI enabled murder victim Chris Pelkey to address an Arizona courtroom -- in the form of a video avatar -- at the sentencing of the man convicted of shooting him dead in 2021 during a clash between motorists.

"I believe in forgiveness," said a digital proxy of Pelkey created by his sister, Stacey Wales.

The judge voiced appreciation for the avatar, saying it seemed authentic.

"I knew it would be powerful," Wales told , "that that it would humanize Chris in the eyes of the judge."

The AI testimony, a first of its kind, ended the sentencing hearing at which Wales and other members of the slain man's family spoke about the impact of the loss.

Since the hearing, examples of GenAI being used in US legal cases have multiplied.

"It is a helpful tool and it is time-saving, as long as the accuracy is confirmed," said attorney Stephen Schwartz, who practices in the northeastern state of Maine.

"Overall, it's a positive development in jurisprudence."

Schwartz described using ChatGPT as well as GenAI legal assistants, such as LexisNexis Protege and CoCounsel from Thomson Reuters, for researching case law and other tasks.

"You can't completely rely on it," Schwartz cautioned, recommending that cases proffered by GenAI be read to ensure accuracy.

"We are all aware of a horror story where AI comes up with mixed-up case things."

The technology has been the culprit behind false legal citations, far-fetched case precedents, and flat-out fabrications.

In early May, a federal judge in Los Angeles imposed $31,100 in fines and damages on two law firms for an error-riddled petition drafted with the help of GenAI, blasting it as a "collective debacle."

The tech is also being relied on by some who skip lawyers and represent themselves in court, often causing legal errors.

And as GenAI makes it easier and cheaper to draft legal complaints, courts already overburdened by caseloads could see them climb higher, said Shay Cleary of the National Center for State Courts.

"Courts need to be prepared to handle that," Cleary said.

Transformation

Law professor Linna sees the potential for GenAI to be part of the solution though, giving more people the ability to seek justice in courts made more efficient.

"We have a huge number of people who don't have access to legal services," Linna said.

"These tools can be transformative; of course we need to be thoughtful about how we integrate them."

Federal judges in the US capitol have written decisions noting their use of ChatGPT in laying out their opinions.

"Judges need to be technologically up-to-date and trained in AI," Linna said.

GenAI assistants already have the potential to influence the outcome of cases the same way a human law clerk might, reasoned the professor.

Facts or case law pointed out by GenAI might sway a judge's decision, and could be different than what a legal clerk would have come up with.

But if GenAI lives up to its potential and excels at finding the best information for judges to consider, that could make for well-grounded rulings less likely to be overturned on appeal, according to Linna.