Google and DOJ pitch their remedies in the ad tech monopoly case

Google and the U.S. Department of Justice released competing proposals this week for remedies in the ad tech monopoly case.

The proposals come after Judge Leonie M. Brinkema ruled last month that Google unlawfully monopolized two ad tech product markets, the publisher ad server market and the ad exchange market.

The DOJ is calling for a significant breakup of Google’s ad tech business: a forced sale of its ad exchange, AdX, and a “phased” divestiture of its publisher ad server, DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP).

Google, for its part, said the DOJ’s proposals “go significantly beyond the Court’s narrow ruling,” according to a blog post by Google VP of Regulatory Affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland.

The remedies trial is scheduled to begin on Sept. 22. For now, here are more details on the proposals from the DOJ and Google.

The DOJ’s proposals

The DOJ is asking the court to order Google to divest AdX “as soon as possible” and for the process to be overseen by a court-appointed trustee.

The DOJ also proposed interim steps, such as requiring Google to offer an API that allows AdX to bid through “header-bidding wrappers” and compete in non-Google publisher ad servers on equal terms with DFP.

Remember, Judge Brinkema also found that Google unlawfully tied AdX and DFP together by requiring publishers to use DFP as their ad server, if they wanted access to real-time bids from AdX. In other words, Google baked AdX into the auction by default and provided it with advantages over competing ad exchanges.

Long term, the DOJ proposed a three-phase process to divest DFP. First, DFP would be required to accept bids from other sources on equal terms with AdX. Next, Google would have to “separate the code that performs the final auction in the publisher ad server” and license it to outside organizations. Finally, Google would divest what remains of DFP.

In Google’s competing proposal, it argued that the codes for both AdX and DFP are too deeply integrated with its proprietary software and hardware systems to be separated.

The DOJ also proposed a series of behavioral remedies, as well as data and transparency provisions, including restrictions that would prevent Google from using its first-party data to give any of its products an unfair advantage over rivals.

Google’s proposals

Google called divestiture “legally unavailable” and “logically unworkable.”

Google says it intends to appeal, though it proposed its own remedies. These include making real-time bid data available to rival ad exchanges, deprecating unified pricing rules and ending the use of First Look or Last Look advantages.

To recap: First Look allowed AdX to buy an impression before rival exchanges could bid, while Last Look let AdX adjust its bid to outbid the highest bid from rival ad exchanges. Unified pricing rules prohibited DFP publishers from setting higher price floors for AdX than for other exchanges — an approach the court found helped Google scale at the expense of competitors.

Google argues that breaking up its ad tech business would raise costs and disproportionately impact small businesses that depend on Google’s affordable, easy-to-use tools to grow.