{"id":17205,"date":"2024-11-25T15:12:26","date_gmt":"2024-11-25T16:12:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/?p=17205"},"modified":"2024-11-25T16:24:02","modified_gmt":"2024-11-25T16:24:02","slug":"the-rocket-docket-judge-who-will-decide-the-fate-of-googles-ad-technology","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/?p=17205","title":{"rendered":"The \u2018Rocket Docket\u2019 Judge Who Will Decide the Fate of Google\u2019s Ad Technology"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>\n

The ruling by a federal judge, Leonie Brinkema, in an antitrust case over Google\u2019s advertising technology could add to the internet company\u2019s woes.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

During a trial in a Virginia courtroom in September over Google\u2019s dominance in advertising technology<\/a>, concepts and phrases like a \u201csecond-price auction,” \u201cdemand-side platforms\u201d and \u201cheader bidding\u201d repeatedly came up.<\/p>\n

Judge Leonie Brinkema of the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, who was presiding in the antitrust case, often grasped within minutes the obscure mechanics of placing ads online. She also pushed lawyers to move on when they slowed down the proceedings with objections, or when witnesses repeated things she had already heard.<\/p>\n

\u201cLet\u2019s go,\u201d Judge Brinkema said again and again.<\/p>\n

The trial lasted just three weeks<\/a>. In contrast, a landmark antitrust trial<\/a> last year over Google\u2019s search dominance took 10 weeks. Another antitrust trial over Google\u2019s app store policies, a case brought by Epic Games, spanned a month. The Microsoft antitrust trial in the late 1990s lasted more than eight months.<\/p>\n

Now Judge Brinkema, 80, is moving the Google ad tech case to its next phase in the federal court where she works, which is known as a \u201crocket docket.\u201d On Monday, she plans to hear closing statements from the Justice Department and a group of states, which brought the ad technology case, and from Google\u2019s lawyers. Earlier this year, she told lawyers she would use closing arguments to answer her remaining questions before she issues her decision, which is expected in the coming months.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Her ruthless efficiency has made the case one of the speediest monopoly trials in recent decades. That could swiftly add to Google\u2019s challenges, since Judge Brinkema could order the Silicon Valley giant to sell many of its ad tech assets if she finds that the company subverted competition. The ad-tech division generated $31 billion last year for Alphabet, Google\u2019s parent company, or 10 percent of its sales.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
The Albert V. Bryan U.S. Courthouse, where the Google ad-technology antitrust trial took place. Judge Leonie Brinkema was the first female U.S. district judge in Alexandria, Va.<\/span>Tom Brenner for The New York Times<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.<\/p>\n

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and\u00a0log into<\/a>\u00a0your Times account, or\u00a0subscribe<\/a>\u00a0for all of The Times.<\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.<\/p>\n

Already a subscriber?\u00a0Log in<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Want all of The Times?\u00a0Subscribe<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The ruling by a federal judge, Leonie Brinkema, in an antitrust case over Google\u2019s advertising technology could add to the internet company\u2019s woes.During a trial in a Virginia courtroom in September over Google\u2019s dominance in advertising technology, concepts and phrases like a \u201csecond-price auction,” \u201cdemand-side platforms\u201d and \u201cheader bidding\u201d repeatedly came up.Judge Leonie Brinkema of the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia, who was presiding in the antitrust case, often grasped within minutes the obscure mechanics of placing ads online. She also pushed lawyers to move on when they slowed down the proceedings with objections, or when witnesses repeated things she had already heard.\u201cLet\u2019s go,\u201d Judge Brinkema said again and again.The trial lasted just three weeks. In contrast, a landmark antitrust trial last year over Google\u2019s search dominance took 10 weeks. Another antitrust trial over Google\u2019s app store policies, a case brought by Epic Games, spanned a month. The Microsoft antitrust trial in the late 1990s lasted more than eight months.Now Judge Brinkema, 80, is moving the Google ad tech case to its next phase in the federal court where she works, which is known as a \u201crocket docket.\u201d On Monday, she plans to hear closing statements from the Justice Department and a group of states, which brought the ad technology case, and from Google\u2019s lawyers. Earlier this year, she told lawyers she would use closing arguments to answer her remaining questions before she issues her decision, which is expected in the coming months.Her ruthless efficiency has made the case one of the speediest monopoly trials in recent decades. That could swiftly add to Google\u2019s challenges, since Judge Brinkema could order the Silicon Valley giant to sell many of its ad tech assets if she finds that the company subverted competition. The ad-tech division generated $31 billion last year for Alphabet, Google\u2019s parent company, or 10 percent of its sales.The Albert V. Bryan U.S. Courthouse, where the Google ad-technology antitrust trial took place. Judge Leonie Brinkema was the first female U.S. district judge in Alexandria, Va.Tom Brenner for The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and\u00a0log into\u00a0your Times account, or\u00a0subscribe\u00a0for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber?\u00a0Log in.Want all of The Times?\u00a0Subscribe.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17207,"comment_status":"close","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17205","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-technology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17205","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=17205"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17205\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":17208,"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17205\/revisions\/17208"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17207"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=17205"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=17205"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/medexperts.pro\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=17205"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}