The United States, at war against the Google monopoly and for an "open internet"

The Department of Justice of the United States (DOJ)

and asks that it divide this business.

It accuses the company of anticompetitive manipulations and of having made key and ongoing acquisitions that severely affected its competition.

The attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee, and Virginia are also part of this lawsuit.

The entity wants to undo two purchases made 15 and 12 years ago -

and

, respectively - and completely change the online advertising market.

It is also the first major case of the Biden Administration against a technology giant.

What are they accusing Google of?

Of not giving room for other companies to thrive in the online advertising market.

And they believe that this could affect the very conception of the Internet and the freedom of users.

As explained by the DOJ, the pages that depend on it for their financing "use advertising tools to generate profits that finance the creation and maintenance of an open and dynamic web, which provides the public with unprecedented access to ideas, artistic expression , information, goods and services".

All of this, as detailed in the lawsuit document, enables an internet that is "

."

Although they compare the importance of advertising with that financed by the traditional media, they recall that "highly sophisticated tools" are used on the Internet that are more reminiscent of those used in the stock market.

Google, considers the US organization, has carried out a "systematic campaign" to gain control of the technologies used in the business and once it had positioned itself in all aspects of the market, it has used " anti-

How does online advertising work?

Actually, the operation is simple, almost automatic, due to the presence of Google.

When a user or organization wants to sell advertising space, they don't have to look for a company or service that wants to advertise there, rather these tools take care of resolving the process.

But there is no competition in the sector - "for reasons that were neither accidental nor unavoidable", accuses the DOJ - and a "mastodon", the search engine, "has corrupted legitimate competition."

What is the value of this market?

It generates

in the United States alone, according to Department of Justice calculations.

And in the country 13,000 million ads are sold a day.

"The sheer volume of these online ads makes the offline ads of the past pale in comparison," they illustrate.

Can it damage the reputation of the brand?

Undoubtedly.

It is not the first time that Google has been accused of this and the days of its beginnings are far gone, when its motto was

-it could be translated as 'Don't be evil'- in which it was a friendlier firm.

Its controversies about privacy have not helped either, although in this sense it is very far from Facebook or Twitter and usually appears in the top positions of the most valued brand classifications.

But the Justice Department hasn't minced anything in the nearly 150-page document detailing

: "to neutralize or eliminate current or potential competitors by a series of acquisitions" and then use this presence to force the entire market to use their products.

If they responded innovatively to this "

", the company's response was "quick and effective" and used its power to "squash the threat". All this results in "a single company with widespread conflicts of interest" controlling the market. Furthermore, they quote one of his own executives in the advertising business, who makes the following analogy: "it's as if Goldman or Citibank owned the New York Stock Exchange."

Is it the first lawsuit of its kind?

No, far from it.

In short, what the DOJ alleges is that Google abuses its dominant position.

In fact, in 2020 he had already accused the firm of carrying out these same anti-competitive practices in the search engine market, although the trial has not yet taken place.

Europe has also fined the company on several occasions for this same reason and has imposed sanctions for its monopoly with its Android operating system (4,125 million euros after reducing the fine) and its price comparator (2,400 million).

Various countries have also done so individually, such as Italy or France, and a case is being prepared that will be presented in courts in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands and could request a fine of 25,000 million euros.

Can the company be affected?

It is still early to tell, but there is a certain consensus among experts that this is a solid case with firm foundations.

The fact that the impact of this monopoly is quantified could be one of the keys.

Google keeps a percentage of each advertising space awarded and this implies a cost to everyone, including the country itself, which is among its clients.

Specifically, they allude to

-by the army, for example- due to taxes or "manipulated prices".

They also provide various examples of the practices of which they accuse the search engine.

What does Google say?

He denies all the accusations.

, vice president of the company's advertising business, has been commissioned to do so in an entry on the firm's blog.

In it, he assures that the Department of Justice "ignores competition", "tries to pick winners and losers" in a very competitive market, uses a "flawed argument" - that it would "slow down innovation", "increase rates" and make it difficult to the growth of "thousands of small businesses and publishers" - and "tries to rewrite history."

Likewise, Taylor recalls that the acquisitions that the DOJ criticizes today were reviewed by regulators, including this same body.

In any case, he believes that since then competition has only increased in the sector.

He also argues that several of his rivals, such as Microsoft, Apple or Amazon, make purchases equally or have higher growth than his without the government accusing them of monopoly.

What's more, he considers that his tools allow him to work with those of other companies.

"No one is forced to use our technology; they choose it because it is effective," counterattacks the manager.

According to the criteria of The Trust Project

Know more

• Google

• Companies