Read on Twitter
1. A few thoughts on the mammoth antitrust complaint filed by 10 AGs against Google for illegal conduct in digital ad markets https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txed.202878/gov.uscourts.txed.202878.1.0.pdf
2. The set of claims is extensive: several Section 2 claims (monopolization; attempted monopolization; tying); a Section 1 claim (conspiracy with Facebook); claims under state antitrust law of 9 states; and claims under state consumer protection law of 6 states.
3. States note Google dominates display advertising, controlling buy-side tools, sell-side tools, and major exchanges & networks. This role across the entire chain creates massive conflicts of interest, which Google has exploited to achieve & maintain its interlocking monopolies.
4. In July @PramilaJayapal asked Pichai about conflicts of interest created via controlling the exchange & trading on both sides. Drawing on @DinaSrinivasan's work, she noted these conflicts & the insider trading they enable are banned in financial markets
5. A few aspects of Google's conduct jump out from complaint. First, not only did Google's integrated role create huge info advantages for Google, but Google repeatedly took active steps to block trading partners' access to info, further creating & exacerbating asymmetries
6. In some cases, Google sought to justify blocking info through appeals to user privacy, but states note that this was anticompetitive opportunism masking as principle.
7. Google used its dominance in the ad server market to block competition in exchange market, and vice versa. When publishers found a way around Google's restrictions, Google panicked, engaging in a combination of deception, insider trading, & collusion with FB to thwart them.
8. The allegations that Google & FB conspired to fix prices & allocate markets are huge, potentially worthy of criminal charges. Basic gist is that Google gave FB's special info & speed advantages so that FB would back off. Great @GiladEdelman overview: https://www.wired.com/story/texas-accuses-google-facebook-illegal-conspiracy/
9. Across markets, Google has consistently promised an open ecosystem only to close it off. The next stage of this: "to capture online publishers on the open internet and transform them into content creators generating revenue for Google on a completely closed platform."
10. Very glad to see states note Google's deception surrounding DoubleClick purchase. When seeking approval to buy DoubleClick, Google told FTC & Congress it couldn't even combine DoubleClick data with its own if it wanted. A few years later it did so anyway (similar to FB/WA).
11. In July @RepValDemings questioned Pichai about Google's deception.
"Did you sign off on the decision to combine the sets of data that Google had told Congress would be kept separate?"
"Did you sign off on the decision to combine the sets of data that Google had told Congress would be kept separate?"
12. States request monetary damages, civil fines, and structural relief (aka breakups). Request for a jury trial is especially interesting, as antitrust jury trials are rare. If granted, jury would be deciding damages (not equitable relief like breakup).
13. Lastly, @DinaSrinivasan's work in this area is indispensable. Her paper mapping out how Google creates & exploits conflicts of interest in display advertising has been enormously useful for shedding light on this key issue:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3500919 https://twitter.com/DinaSrinivasan/status/1339329909269749760
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3500919 https://twitter.com/DinaSrinivasan/status/1339329909269749760
