Recognized last April guilty of monopoly in advertising, the Internet giant awaited his sentence. It could be very heavy for Google if the court follows the request of the United States government. The decision will take place next September.
The American government claimed on Friday the dismantling of Google’s activity in online advertising from the federal judge responsible for determining the fate of the group, after having recognized it guilty of monopoly.
The representative of the Ministry of Justice Julia Tarver argued, during an audience in Alexandria (Virginia), that the alphabet subsidiary had already “found means to escape the law”.
Google has lost its trial against the United States Ministry of Justice, being accused of having “caused substantial damage” to publisher and web users with its anti -competitive practices. Leaving intact “a repeat monopolist” would therefore not allow, according to the public prosecutor, to solve the problem posed by the dominant position of Google on the digital advertising market.
Friday’s hearing was a step before a new trial to determine the penalty imposed on Google, which must be held at the end of September.
Judge Leonie Brinkema estimated, in its decision-making in mid-April, that the Mountain View group (California) was in a monopoly situation in the field of advertisement software on online sites as well as for platforms connecting advertisers and site publishers.
The government wants Google to separate from these two tools.
Another trial puts Google in danger
In another file, Washington Federal Judge Amit Mehta determined that Google was abuse of a dominant position for internet research.
A trial is currently being held to determine the sentence imposed on the group. In this case, the government requests, among other things, the sale by Google of its Chrome browser.
“Behavior changes would not be sufficient,” said Julia Tarver Wood, concerning advertising, “because that would not prevent Google from finding other ways to ensure a dominant position”.
Google suggested that it make commitments to share, with advertisers and publishers, data relating to its platforms.
The group’s lawyer, Karen Dunn, took note of “credibility issues” aimed at Google in the file and indicated that the company would accept that the implementation of these commitments is the subject of supervision.
Judge Brinkema recommended the parties to agree before the trial, to avoid additional costs and deadlines.
