Google?s Antitrust Cases: A Guide for the Perplexed

Two of the cases focus on Google’s monopoly in search and search advertising; the third focuses on its control over what you might call non-search advertising.OK, so what are the cases?The US Department of Justice filed the first case in October, joined initially by eleven Republican state attorneys general. (In fact, the states have requested that their suit be combined with the DOJ’s.) The most important new piece is the allegation that Google has used its monopoly over general search—the activity commonly known as Googling—to discriminate against companies in what’s known as the vertical search business, like Yelp or Kayak. This is illegal, the states claim, because the goal and effect is to entrench Google’s share of the search market, rather than to steer users to the best results.What does Google say to that?Google’s public response so far is simple: The changes it has made are simply about making Google search more useful and relevant to users. According to the states’ complaint, Google exploits its control over the advertising pipeline to impose unfair conditions on advertisers and publishers, discriminate against rival ad tech firms, and rake in a bigger cut of online ad spending than it would earn if there were more middlemen competing for the business.Gilad EdelmanWIRED StaffGilad EdelmanThe Texas lawsuit also includes a surprising allegation: that Google struck an unlawful deal to get Facebook to ease up on competing with its ad business in exchange for preferential treatment in Google-run ad auctions. The common thread in all three lawsuits is the accusation that Google has engaged in anti-competitive conduct designed to entrench its monopoly position, instead of purely trying to win on the merits.So, why exactly did different groups of states sign onto the different suits?It may have something to do with politics.