Connect with us

News

Google ‘wilfully’ monopolised online advertising market, US judge rules

Published

on

Google ‘wilfully’ monopolised online advertising market, US judge rules

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

A US federal judge has ruled Google illegally acquired and maintained a monopoly in digital advertising, the latest antitrust defeat for the technology giant that could result in it being forced to divest parts of its business.

Leonie Brinkema, the district judge presiding over the case in Virginia, on Thursday said Google had “wilfully” monopolised two parts of the digital advertising market: the technology online publishers use to sell ad space, and the biggest exchange on which businesses bid for ads.

However, Brinkema found the US Department of Justice, which brought the case, was not able to prove Google unfairly dominated the third component of the market, advertiser ad networks.

Advertisement

The ruling comes after a federal judge in a separate antitrust case last year found the company spent billions of dollars on exclusive deals to maintain an illegal monopoly on search.

The second phase of that trial, in which the court will determine remedies that could include forcing Google to sell parts of its business, begins next week.

The DoJ asked in the search case for Google to sell its Chrome browser, cease $20bn in payments to Apple each year to be its default search engine, and share more data with rivals.

Brinkema on Thursday wrote: “For over a decade, Google has tied its publisher ad server and ad exchange together through contractual policies and technological integration, which enabled the company to establish and protect its monopoly power in these two markets.”

“Google further entrenched its monopoly power by imposing anti-competitive policies on its customers and eliminating desirable product features,” she added.

Advertisement

But she rejected the way the DoJ had tried to define the third part of the market, saying the term “advertiser ad network” was uncommon in the industry and “unduly exclude[s]” publishers.

Google said: “We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half . . . We disagree with the court’s decision regarding our publisher tools. Publishers have many options and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable and effective.”

The ruling is the latest win for the former antitrust officials appointed by ex-president Joe Biden who brought and litigated the case before Donald Trump returned to the White House.

Jonathan Kanter, the former head of the DoJ’s antitrust unit, said in a post on X on Thursday: “Today is a huge victory for antitrust enforcement, the media industry, and the free and open internet . . . Google is now an illegal monopolist twice over.”

Antitrust officials appointed by Trump have strongly signalled they intend to adopt a tough stance on enforcement, especially against Big Tech. The US Federal Trade Commission this week began making its case against Meta in a monopoly trial in Washington federal court.

Advertisement

“This is a landmark victory in the ongoing fight to stop Google from monopolising the digital public square,” US attorney-general Pam Bondi said in a statement. “This Department of Justice will continue taking bold legal action to protect the American people from encroachments on free speech and free markets by tech companies.”

The EU’s competition chief Teresa Ribera said earlier on Thursday: “We take note of the decision and we will study it with interest. The case being analysed by the European Commission continues.”

The commission is also investigating Google for favouring its own advertising services.

Additional reporting by Barbara Moens in Brussels

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

News

Man Charged With Posting Bomb Instructions Used in New Orleans Attack

Published

on

Man Charged With Posting Bomb Instructions Used in New Orleans Attack

Federal prosecutors have filed charges against a former Army serviceman they accused of distributing instructions on how to build explosives that were used by a man who conducted a deadly attack in New Orleans on New Year’s Day last year.

The former serviceman, Jordan A. Derrick, a 40-year-old from Missouri, was charged with one count of engaging in the business of manufacturing explosive materials without a license; one count of unlawful possession of an unregistered destructive device; and one count of distributing information relating to manufacturing explosives, according to a criminal complaint unsealed on Wednesday. The three charges together carry a maximum sentence of 40 years in federal prison.

Starting in September 2023, the authorities said, Mr. Derrick was using various social media sites to share videos of himself making explosive materials, including detonators. His videos provided step-by-step instructions, and he often engaged with viewers in comments, sometimes answering their questions about the chemistry behind the explosives.

The authorities said that Mr. Derrick’s videos were downloaded by Shamsud-Din Bahar Jabbar, 42, who was accused of ramming a pickup truck into a crowd on Bourbon Street in New Orleans on Jan. 1, 2025, in a terrorist attack that killed 14 people and injured dozens. Mr. Jabbar was killed in a shootout with the police. Before the attack, Mr. Jabbar had placed two explosives on Bourbon Street, the authorities said, but they did not detonate.

The authorities later recovered two laptops and a USB drive in a house that Mr. Jabbar had rented. The USB drive contained several videos created by Mr. Derrick that provided instructions on making explosives. The authorities said the explosives they recovered were consistent with the ones Mr. Derrick had posted about.

Advertisement

Mr. Derrick’s lawyers did not respond to requests for comment.

Mr. Derrick was a combat engineer in the Army, where he provided personnel and vehicle support, the authorities said. He also helped supervise safety personnel during demolitions and various operations. He was honorably discharged in February 2013.

The authorities did not say whether Mr. Derrick had any communication with Mr. Jabbar, or whether the men had known each other. In some of Mr. Derrick’s videos and comments, he indicated that he was aware that his videos could be misused.

“There are a plethora of uh, moral, you know, entanglements with topics, any topic of teaching explosives, right?” he asked in one video, according to the affidavit. “Of course, the wrong people could get it.”

The authorities also said that an explosion occurred at a private residence in Odessa, Mo., on May 4, and the occupant of the residence told investigators that he had manufactured explosives after watching online tutorials from Mr. Derrick.

Advertisement

Mr. Derrick’s YouTube account had more than 15,000 subscribers and 20 published videos, the affidavit said. He had also posted content on other platforms, including Odysee and Patreon. Some videos were accessible to the public for free, while others required a paid subscription to view.

“My responsibility to my countrymen is to make sure that I serve the function of the Second Amendment to strengthen it,” Mr. Derrick said in one of his videos, according to the affidavit. “This is how I serve my country for real.”

Outside of the income he received through content creation, Mr. Derrick did not have any known employment. He did receive a monthly disability check from Veterans Affairs, the affidavit stated.

Continue Reading

News

The Girls: “This isn’t ringing alarms to y’all?” : Embedded

Published

on

The Girls: “This isn’t ringing alarms to y’all?” : Embedded
Allegations pile up, but Child Protective Services declines to investigate and the school district continues to promote Ronnie Stoner. We include an update at the end of the episode. “The Girls” is a 4-part series from the Louisville Public Media’s investigative podcast, Dig.
Continue Reading

News

Chud the Builder, Known for Racist Confrontations, Charged With Attempted Murder

Published

on

Chud the Builder, Known for Racist Confrontations, Charged With Attempted Murder

A streamer known for hurling racist slurs in public settings under the nickname “Chud the Builder” was charged with attempted murder after a shooting outside a Tennessee courthouse on Wednesday, the authorities said.

The streamer, Dalton Eatherly, 28, was involved in a confrontation with an unidentified man that escalated to gunfire outside the Montgomery County Court in Clarksville, about 50 miles northwest of Nashville, the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. Both men sustained gunshot wounds and were in stable condition, the office said.

In addition to attempted murder, Mr. Eatherly was charged with employing a firearm during dangerous felony, aggravated assault and reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, the sheriff’s office said.

Mr. Eatherly, who is white, has accumulated an online audience by livestreaming confrontations in which he uses racist language toward Black people in public.

Law enforcement did not provide any details about the second man involved in Wednesday’s shooting. Mr. Eatherly posted an audio recording online of paramedics treating his wounds in which he claims he shot the man in self-defense.

Advertisement

A video posted by the website Clarksville Now shows Mr. Eatherly on a stretcher with a microphone attached to his lapel.

Mr. Eatherly is being held at the Montgomery County Jail, pending arraignment, the sheriff’s office said.

According to court records, Mr. Eatherly was scheduled to appear for a court hearing on Wednesday morning in an unrelated case brought by Midland Credit Management, a collections agency.

A lawyer listed in court records from a separate harassment case in which Mr. Eatherly was a defendant in November did not respond to a request for comment.

On Sunday, three days before the shooting in Clarksville, Mr. Eatherly was arrested in Nashville. According to a police affidavit, Mr. Eatherly live streamed his meal at a restaurant, Bob’s Steak and Chop House, on Saturday even though the restaurant had asked him ahead of time not to do so.

Advertisement

When he was confronted, Mr. Eatherly “became disruptive and started making racial statements, yelling, screaming and otherwise creating a scene,” according to the affidavit.

He then refused to pay for his $370 meal. Mr. Eatherly was charged with theft of services, disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. He was released on $5,000 bond.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending