Just three weeks after it began, the Google ad tech antitrust trial in Virginia is over.
(Arielle Garcia, you can go home now! Thank you for your service.)
The trial was expected to last between four to six weeks, but Judge Leonie Brinkema, who presided over the case, kept things moving at a brisk pace.
The court will now take a nearly two-month break before reconvening for closing arguments right before Thanksgiving.
That’s a wrap
Google rested its defense on Friday, closing out its case by reading two final witness depositions into the record. The first was from Ryan Pauley, president of revenue and growth at Vox Media, and the other came from Brian Bumpers, a marketing analytics manager at ecommerce apparel site Zulily.
The government recalled one single rebuttal witness, Matthew Wheatland, chief digital officer at DailyMail.com. Rebuttal witnesses are witnesses called by the plaintiff to refute evidence presented by the defense once the defense is done doing its thing.
Click here for a rundown on what Pauley, Bumpers and Wheatland had to say on the Check My Ads portal dedicated to coverage of the case.
Now what?
Now that both sides have finished presenting their respective arguments, it’s up to Judge Brinkema to make her decision.
But there’s a lot that has to happen before she rules.
First, both sides have until Monday, November 4, to submit their revised findings of fact, a legal document that outlines the material facts in a case. Each side gets to write one. Google and the DOJ both filed proposed findings of fact in the weeks before the trial started.
Judge Brinkema will have three weeks to review the documents and, if time allows, prepare an early draft opinion.
And then it’s time for everyone to cram back into the courthouse: Closing arguments are scheduled for 10 am on Monday, November 25.
Both sides will apparently get longer than the 30 minutes they were each allotted to make their opening statements earlier this month. The judge will also have the opportunity to ask questions during closing arguments.
Once that’s finished, it’s possible we’ll have a ruling from Judge Brinkema by early next year. And if she finds in the DOJ’s favor, then it’s time to decide on the punishment, which would be decided during a subsequent hearing.
The long haul
But Google will no doubt appeal if it loses – and the same goes for any ruling not in its favor.
For example, Google plans to appeal after losing the DOJ’s antitrust lawsuit earlier this year. The judge in that case, Judge Amit Mehta, found that Google operates a monopoly in two markets: general online search and text-based search advertising.
A second trial to determine remedies in the search case is set for April, and Judge Mehta has said he’s aiming to determine penalties by August 2025.
Meanwhile, Google is confident it put up a solid defense in the ad tech case, including its arguments that it doesn’t have a duty to deal with its competitors and “open web display advertising” is a gerrymandered market definition the DOJ cooked up to support its case.
In a blog post on Friday summarizing Google’s defense, Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s VP of regulatory affairs, claims ad tech was, is and remains a fiercely competitive business and “header bidding is alive and well.” (Despite Google’s best efforts, the DOJ might argue.)
“In reality many digital ads are not sold on ad exchanges and most publishers don’t use Google Ad Manager,” Mulholland wrote. “Direct deals, where ad buyers and sellers bypass an exchange entirely, make up 70% of all digital ads spending.”
Well, that’s up to Judge Brinkema. And regardless of the outcome here, Google will remain in the antitrust hot seat.
Google faces a similar set of allegations over its abuse of market power in the digital advertising market in a separate antitrust case brought by a group of state attorneys general led by Texas.
That trial is scheduled for earlyish next year.