NEW YORK - Yesterday, Texas and the other states pursuing an antitrust lawsuit against Google responded to the company’s motion to dismiss four counts of allegations made in the litigation.
Since its filing last year, more than a dozen states have joined the Texas-led lawsuit, which alleges antitrust violations and deceptive acts by Google in its lucrative online display advertising business.
According to the complaint, Google’s monopolization includes an anticompetitive agreement with Facebook, making misrepresentations to users and customers, and suppressing competition.
In its motion to dismiss, Google argues that the state plaintiffs are responding to the company’s success by seeking to compel it to share with its competitors “the fruits of its investments and innovation.”
Conversely, the state plaintiffs contend Google targeted and successfully impeded developing competition and also deceived its customers.
“Google is one of the largest and most powerful companies in human history. But it did not reach its vaunted position through superior innovation or honest competition,” the states’ opposition filing states.
“Over the last decade, Google has deceived its own customers, scuttled threatening new technology, suppressed consumer choice, and conspired with its largest competitor, all with the aims of obtaining and cementing its monopolies and decimating its rivals in advertising technology markets.”
In its motion to dismiss, Google argues the states’ monopolization and attempted monopolization claims (Counts one and two) fail because they have not alleged facts plausibly showing that it has engaged in anticompetitive conduct.
Google further asserts that the state plaintiffs’ third amended complaint fails to allege facts showing that Google coerced the publishers that use Google’s ad exchange to purchase its ad server.
In the fourth count, the state plaintiffs argue that it was unlawful for Google and Facebook to enter into a Network Bidding Agreement that enabled Facebook to bid against Google and other buyers in Google’s auctions.
And while the states suggest that Facebook agreed not to support header bidding when it signed the NBA, they cannot cite any provision in the NBA to that effect, Google argues.
Google maintains that its ad tech products benefit publishers and advertisers, while helping keep the internet free and open for everyone.
The case is currently in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, case No. 1:21-md-03010-PKC.