How Google Defended Itself in the Ad Tech Antitrust Trial

Over the past week, Google has called more than a dozen witnesses to defend itself against claims by the Justice Department and a group of state attorneys general that it has a monopoly in advertising software that places ads on web pages, part of a second major federal antitrust trial against the tech giant.

Google’s lawyers wrapped up their arguments in the case on Friday, and the government will now offer a rebuttal. Judge Leonie Brinkema of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, who is presiding over the nonjury trial, is expected to deliver a ruling by the end of the year, after both sides summarize their cases in writing and deliver closing arguments.

The government last week concluded its main arguments in the case, U.S. et al. v. Google, which was filed last year and accuses Google of building a monopoly over the technology that places ads on websites around the internet.

The company’s defense has centered on how its actions were justified and how it helped publishers, advertisers and competition. Here are Google’s main arguments.

How Google claims its actions were justified

The Justice Department and a group of states have accused the tech company of abusing control of its ad technology and violating antitrust law, in part through its 2008 acquisition of the advertising software company DoubleClick. Google has pushed up ad prices and harmed publishers by taking a big cut of each sale, the government argued.

But Google’s lawyers countered that the ad tech industry was intensely competitive. They also accused the Justice Department of ignoring rivals like Facebook, Microsoft and Amazon to make its case sound more compelling.