��������

Google has illegally built “monopoly power�� with its web advertising business, a federal judge in Virginia has ruled, siding with the Justice Department in a landmark case against the tech giant that could reshape the basic economics of running a modern website.The ruling that Google violated antirust law marks the U.S. government’s second major court victory over Google in recent months amid claims the company has illegally monopolized key parts of the internet ecosystem, including online search. And it is the third such decision since a federal jury in December 2023 found that Google’s proprietary app store is also an illegal monopoly.Taken together, the trio of decisions highlights the breadth of trouble Google faces, raising the prospect of sweeping penalties that could reshape multiple aspects of its business, though ongoing and expected appeals will likely take years to play out.Thursday’s decision by District Judge Leonie Brinkema, of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, addresses the $31 billion portion of Google’s ad business that matches website publishers with advertisers. This “stack�� of technologies determines what banner ads appear on countless sites across the web.CNN has reached out to Google and the Department of Justice for comment.The Justice Department’s lawsuit follows years of criticism that Google’s extensive role in the digital ecosystem that enables advertisers to place ads �� and for publishers to offer up digital ad space �� represented a conflict of interest that Google exploited anticompetitively.But Google had argued that the Justice Department’s argument is “flawed�� and would “slow innovation, raise advertising fees, and make it harder for thousands of small businesses and publishers to grow,�� according to a statement from a company spokesperson after the lawsuit was filed in 2023.Brinkema, however, wrote in her decision that by tying its ad server and ad exchange together, Google was able to “establish and protect its monopoly power in these two markets.”“In addition to depriving rivals of the ability to compete, this exclusionary conduct substantially harmed Google’s publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web,�� she wrote.