{"id":389622,"date":"2025-04-18T00:29:21","date_gmt":"2025-04-17T18:59:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/google-hit-with-major-antitrust-ruling-over-online-advertising-practices-all-about-the-case-crypto-news\/"},"modified":"2025-04-18T00:33:24","modified_gmt":"2025-04-17T19:03:24","slug":"google-hit-with-major-antitrust-ruling-over-online-advertising-practices-all-about-the-case-crypto-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/google-hit-with-major-antitrust-ruling-over-online-advertising-practices-all-about-the-case-crypto-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Google hit with major antitrust ruling over online advertising practices: All about the case – Crypto News"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/p>\n

\n

In a significant blow to Google\u2019s advertising empire, a US federal judge has ruled that the California-based tech giant illegally monopolised parts of the online advertising technology market, undermining competition.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The ruling, delivered on Thursday by US District Judge<\/a> Leonie Brinkema, found that Google had violated antitrust laws in two critical areas: advertising exchanges and publisher ad servers \u2013 the tools used by websites to sell advertising space. However, the court did not agree that Google held a monopoly in a third market: tools used by advertisers to purchase display ads.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Judge Brinkema wrote in her 115-page opinion <\/a>that \u201cGoogle has willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts to acquire and maintain monopoly power.\u201d She accused the company of tying its ad exchange and publisher server systems together through contracts and technological means, ensuring dominance in the open-web display advertising ecosystem.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u201cFor over a decade, Google imposed policies and stripped features that would have benefited competitors,\u201d Brinkema added, noting that these moves ultimately harmed publishers, stifled innovation, and negatively impacted consumers who rely on a free and competitive internet.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The decision marks the second major antitrust defeat for Google<\/a> in recent times. In a separate case, the company was also found to have unlawfully monopolised the online search market. A trial to determine potential remedies, including the possible break-up of parts of the company such as the Chrome browser, is scheduled to begin next week in Washington.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

The case, filed in 2023 by the US Justice Department alongside a coalition of states, is part of a broader crackdown on Big Tech\u2019s market power. Google has not yet responded to the latest ruling.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Alphabet Inc., Google\u2019s parent company,<\/a> saw its shares dip by as much as 3.2 per cent following the decision, while shares in rival ad tech firm Trade Desk surged nearly 8 per cent, reflecting investor expectations of a shift in the competitive landscape.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

(With inputs from Bloomberg)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In a significant blow to Google\u2019s advertising empire, a US federal judge has ruled that the California-based tech giant illegally monopolised parts of the online advertising technology market, undermining competition. The ruling, delivered on Thursday by US District Judge Leonie Brinkema, found that Google had violated antitrust laws in two critical areas: advertising exchanges and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":389623,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[34746,34749,8317,8312,188,183,34755,34759,185,186,34754,34752,34753,34747,34743,34758,34751,187,184,34745,34756,34748,189,150,34757,182,190,34750,34744,1310],"class_list":["post-389622","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-technology","tag-ad-tech-market","tag-alphabet-share-dip","tag-anticompetitive-behavior","tag-big-tech-regulation","tag-blockchain-tech","tag-blockchain-technology","tag-chrome-browser-breakup","tag-competition-law","tag-crypto-technology","tag-cryptocurrency-technology","tag-digital-advertising-tools","tag-display-ads-market","tag-doj-vs-google","tag-google-advertising-exchange","tag-google-antitrust-ruling","tag-google-market-dominance","tag-judge-leonie-brinkema","tag-metaverse-technology","tag-nft-technology","tag-online-advertising-monopoly","tag-open-web-advertising","tag-publisher-ad-server","tag-soul-bound-token","tag-tech","tag-tech-monopoly","tag-technology","tag-token-technology","tag-trade-desk-surge","tag-us-federal-judge","tag-us-justice-department"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/389622","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=389622"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/389622\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":389625,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/389622\/revisions\/389625"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/389623"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=389622"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=389622"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dripp.zone\/news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=389622"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}