In the ongoing legal battle between media giant Gannett and tech titan Google, the courtroom drama escalated yet again with Google firing back at Gannett’s antitrust complaint. As the legal process unfolds, it appears that a resolution might be a long way off.
Google responded vigorously to Gannett’s accusations, contending that Gannett failed to provide substantial grounds justifying special treatment for claims that the court had previously dismissed in a similar case. In their filing made last Friday, Google urged the court to dismiss Gannett’s antitrust complaint, which was filed in June, regarding Google’s alleged anti-competitive practices.
The crux of Google’s argument revolved around the dismissal of Gannett’s claims related to Google’s tools and products, including exchange bidding, encrypted user IDs, accelerated mobile pages (AMP), enhanced dynamic allocation (EDA), minimum bid to win, and line-item capping. Google vehemently denied Gannett’s assertion that it was coerced into participating in exchange bidding or that exchange bidding was anti-competitive. Moreover, Google challenged Gannett’s failure to demonstrate how EDA, a tool enhancing dynamic allocation, harmed competition in any market.
According to Google’s filing, Gannett also fell short in proving that encrypted user IDs and AMP were anti-competitive. Google asserted that Gannett failed to show that AMP forced publishers to abandon client-side header bidding, a key point in Gannett’s complaint.
The filing from Google concluded with a strong statement, advocating for the dismissal of Gannett’s claims with prejudice. Google argued that Gannett, being an experienced litigant in this matter, had already been privy to the court’s orders and Google’s counterarguments against previous complaints.
However, Gannett remained resolute, citing that the court had already sustained allegations that Google committed multiple anticompetitive acts over a decade. The legal battle between these industry giants continues, leaving the fate of Gannett’s antitrust complaint hanging in the balance as the court deliberates on the complex issues raised by both parties.
Source: Media Post