Google rejects DOJ's ad tech remedies as overreach, offers interoperability alternative

New Delhi: Google has strongly criticised the US Department of Justice's (DOJ) proposed remedies in its ongoing antitrust case over advertising technology, arguing that the demands exceed the court's recent ruling and could damage publishers, advertisers, and small businesses reliant on its tools. 

In a blog post released ahead of the remedies phase trial set to begin on Monday, the tech giant outlined its own counterproposal aimed at addressing the issues.

The case stems from the DOJ's allegations that Google has maintained an illegal monopoly in certain ad tech areas, particularly through its Ad Manager platform, which enables the buying and selling of ads across websites, apps, connected TVs, and video platforms. 

While Google disagreed with the court's liability decision and plans to appeal, it must first navigate the remedies phase. The DOJ is pushing for the divestiture of Ad Manager, a move Google claims ignores the court's finding that its past acquisitions did not harm competition. Google warns that such a forced sale could make it harder for publishers to monetise content and more expensive for advertisers to reach audiences, with particular risks to small businesses in an increasingly competitive digital ad market.

In its defence, Google argued that the DOJ's approach misunderstands the dynamics of digital advertising, which has seen growing competition from new players and evolving technologies. The company emphasises that the remedies should focus on resolving specific concerns without upending effective systems. 

As an alternative, Google has proposed enhancing Ad Manager's interoperability, allowing publishers to integrate third-party tools for real-time access to advertiser bids. This solution, detailed in a public document, is said to align with requests from the DOJ's own witnesses during the liability phase and fully address the court's findings without negative impacts on users.

"Getting the remedies right is crucial," the blog post states, highlighting the need to balance antitrust enforcement with the realities of a fast-changing industry. 

Google expressed eagerness to present its case in court, underscoring that poorly designed remedies could stifle innovation and harm the broader economy.