Is it written into American law that when you’re describing really boring anti-trust cases you have to write half a dozen pages of purple prose as though you’re pitching to write a Harry Potter sequel? It comes across as incredibly unprofessional https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/admin/2020/Press/20201216%20COMPLAINT_REDACTED.pdf

Tone apart, this is a very detailed unpicking of the display ad stack. People will argue about parts of it, but there’s really no question Google has market power and uses lots of different levers to drive that. The argument is which parts are illegal, and how to change that 2/

This is also the model of the CMA report in the summer - the big difference being that the UK / EU models don’t need to prove a crime before forcing change. But change is even more technical. What do you separate and what internal mechanics do you regulate? What would work?

Also, I would love to know what this is claiming. WhatsApp uses GCP for backups. That doesn’t mean Google got access to anything. So was there something else going on?