Google was branded as an abusive monopolist for the second time in less than one year by a federal court. The judge said that Google had illegally abused their online marketing technology to boost profit, fueling an internet empire worth $1.8 trillion.

In August, a U.S. district judge in Virginia ruled that Google had used their dominant position to suppress competition and innovation.

The U.S. Justice Department in 2023 targeted Google’s digital ad network, which was profitable, under the presidency of Joe Biden. The U.S. Justice Department attempted to limit the power that Google had amassed in Silicon Valley since it was founded in 1998.

Google has a long-term fight ahead of it, even though antitrust regulators won in both cases. Google appeals the two monopoly rulings and is pushing ahead on the lucrative artificial intelligence technology frontier.

The penalty phase is expected to begin in late 2018 or early 2019. In Washington, D.C., the “remedy proceeding” in search monopoly lawsuits will start Monday. Justice Department lawyers will attempt to convince U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta that a broad punishment should be imposed, including a requirement to sell Google’s Chrome web browser.

Brinkema’s 115-page report focuses on Google’s marketing machine that it has built over 17 years around the popular YouTube video site, digital maps, and other Google products.

The system is built on a series of acquisitions, which began in 2008 when Google purchased DoubleClick. At that time, US regulators approved these deals without realizing Mountain View, California, had the opportunity to manipulate prices of websites that depended on them for their revenue.

The Justice Department’s lawyers alleged that Google had built and maintained a dominating position in the market for a trio of technologies used by advertising exchanges and websites to sell ads, advertisers to display their advertisements to consumers, and ad networks to run automated auctions matching buyers and sellers within fractions of seconds.

Brinkema, on the basis of evidence presented in a long trial that ended just before Thanksgiving last year, rejected claims made by the Justice Department that Google treated its advertisers unfairly. Brinkema concluded that Google had abused its power to suppress competition at the expense of online publishers who were forced to rely on Google’s network for revenue.

Brinkema claimed that Google’s anticompetitive practices and removal of desirable features further cemented its monopoly.

Brinkema concluded, despite criticism, that Google did not break the law by acquiring DoubleClick, and then following up with Admeld a few more years later.

Brinkema stated in his letter, “The Justice Department had failed to prove that the DoubleClick and Admeld purchases were anticompetitive. “

This discovery may help Google to resist attempts to force it to sell its advertising technologies to end its monopolistic behaviour.

The Justice Department is yet to comment on the judge’s decision.

Google announced that it would appeal the ruling.

Lee Anne Mulholland is the vice-president of regulatory affairs for Google. She said, “We don’t agree with the Court’s decision regarding our Publisher’s Tools. Publishers have many options, but they choose Google Ad Technology because it is simple, affordable, and effective.”

Analysts like Brian Pitz, of BMO Markets, said that Google was likely to lose this case. Alphabet Inc. shares fell 1% during afternoon trading. Alphabet Inc.’s shares have fallen by 20 percent so far this year.

Alphabet’s parent, Google, has denied the Justice Department’s accusations. Their lawyers claim that the government’s claim is based on a dated concept of the advertising industry. These companies included Meta Platforms as well as Amazon, Microsoft, and Comcast.

Karen Dunn, a Google lawyer who represented the company in the September trial last year, compared the government’s market definition to “a time capsule with an iPod and a BlackBerry”.

At trial, the Justice Department’s attorneys stressed that Google’s alleged dominant position in the market caused harm to publishers of news. Gannett, publisher of USA Today, and other newspapers, as well as News Corp., publisher of The Wall Street Journal, testified on the difficulties and lack of Google’s advertising technology. The government lawyers claim the companies are reliant on online advertising to fund their operations and provide free articles to internet users.

The government has the right to remove this confusing advertising system. The technology used by both website publishers and ad networks is included.