DOJ aims to break up Google’s ad business as antitrust case resumes

Google is back in court, hoping to avoid a painful breakup of its advertising business. US District Judge Leonie Brinkema has already ruled that Google operated an illegal monopoly in digital advertising, and now it's time to learn the consequences of that behavior. Google's had mixed luck with antitrust rulings lately, but it's not a great sign that Google has so many legal woes that it can be hard to keep them all straight. The case that just got underway is the remedy phase of the AdTech trial, in which the DOJ secured a ruling against Google several months ago. The remedy phase of the search trial wrapped up recently, which ended with Google holding on to Chrome but pledging an appeal to overturn the verdict. There's also the Google Play antitrust case, which was brought by Epic Games. In this case, Google has already lost its appeal, putting some major app changes on the table as it plans yet another appeal. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and Google are squaring off in Virginia federal court for the next two weeks or so, and there are no surprises in opening arguments. The government says the only way to deal with a monopolist like this is to break it up, but Google says it has already made numerous changes, and there's no way to excise it from online advertising without breaking the market. The AdTech remedy trial could mirror the search trial to a great degree. Indeed, the DOJ has pulled some language from that case, in which Judge Mehta opted not to force a divestment of Chrome. Mehta ruled that forcing a Chrome sale was a poor fit for the remedies as Chrome was not part of the illegal conduct. However, government lawyers are hoping the AdTech case will turn out differently. The DOJ is asking the court to force Google to spin off Google Ad Manager (formerly Ad Exchange or AdX), the marketplace through which advertisers buy ads on Google's platform. The government was able to convince the court that Google's control of Ad Manager gave it an unfair advantage that boosted its own services, but is a breakup the proper remedy?