Google has lost an important antitrust lawsuit following a judge’s ruling that it unlawfully amassed ‘monopoly power’ to dominate online advertising.

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued the decision on Thursday, marking a substantial win for online news outlets.

The decision vindicates dozens of organizations around the globe that faced disadvantages due to Google's practices.

The chief digital officer of Daily Mail, Matthew Wheatland, played a crucial role as a witness in the lawsuit brought forth by the Department of Justice. This legal action demonstrated that the technology company engages in practices that hinder market competition in two significant sectors.

These two sectors—the market for publisher ad servers and the marketplace for open-web display advertising through ad exchanges—were illegally dominated by Google's monopolistic control For the past ten years, the judge made rulings every Thursday.

Nevertheless, Judge Brinkema rejected the idea that Google had a monopoly over the instruments utilized by advertisers for purchasing display advertisements.

She likewise criticized the firm for its 'pervasive neglect of the procedural guidelines concerning the destruction of evidence and its improper use of attorney-client confidentiality'.

Immediately after the landmark ruling in Virginia On Thursday, Alphabet’s stock price dropped by 3.2 percent, marking yet another significant setback for the struggling tech giant.

Judge Brinkema stated that the firm employed "contractual policies and technological integration" as means to eventually stifle other news publishers within the platform.

It was discovered that Google implemented policies aimed at deterring competitors from serving its clients, along with eliminating certain appealing product features. This left rival search engines without the means to effectively compete.

In her 115-page ruling, Judge Brinkema stated that this decision pertains globally to Google's activities. She noted, "Google has deliberately carried out multiple actions aimed at fostering anti-competitive practices to gain and sustain monopolistic control over publisher ad servers and ad exchanges within the realm of open-web display advertising."

She stated that Google reinforced its dominant market position by implementing anti-competitive measures for its clients and removing beneficial product functionalities.

Apart from disallowing competitors from participating fairly, this restrictive behavior significantly damaged Google’s publishing clients, disrupted the competitive landscape, and ultimately hurt consumers accessing information on the open web.

In September’s antitrust proceedings, Mr. Wheatland informed the court: "Our company generates content deemed significant and engaging by Americans, and our revenue comes from display advertisements managed via Google."

'Suppressing prices by Google for publishers eventually leads to decreased revenue for them, which consequently implies that we cannot fund journalism as extensively as we might have been able to otherwise.'

Google has stated that they will contest the portion of the ruling they disagree with.

Lee-Anne Mulholland, who serves as Google's vice president for regulatory matters, stated The Verge :The Court determined that our advertising instruments and our purchases, like DoubleClick, do not negatively impact competition.

We do not agree with the Court's ruling about our publisher tools. There are numerous alternatives available, yet publishers opt for Google due to the simplicity, affordability, and effectiveness of our advertising technology solutions.

The US Department of Justice has requested a court hearing scheduled for next week in Washington. The purpose is to explore whether forcing Google to divest itself of its popular Chrome browser could help curb its overwhelming control over internet search activities. A judge will preside over this proceeding with potential additional actions under consideration.

Jonathan Kanter, the ex-Leader of Antitrust at the Justice Department, welcomed the result on Thursday.

He told Bloomberg That ruling represents a significant triumph for antitrust enforcement, the media sector, and maintaining a free and open Internet. I'm immensely proud of our team at the DOJ and collaborators among the state attorneys general for achieving this landmark victory.

'Google has now become an unlawful monopoly two times over.'

The decision made on Thursday follows closely after a fresh legal action against Google was unveiled in Britain.

A collective legal case, alleging possible losses amounting to as much as $6.6 billion, has been initiated against the firm for supposedly misusing its predominant stance in the online search sector.

Submitted to the Competition Appeal Tribunal, this fresh lawsuit argues that Google's maneuvers enabled the company to demand increased fees for advertisements displayed in response to search queries.

Read more