More than 20 European news publishers are taking legal action against Google seeking damages of £550m for adtech monopoly abuses.
The case comes off the back of the European Commission handing Google a fine of €2.95bn (£2.55bn) last year for abusing its dominant position in online advertising technology.
The European Commission said that any people or company affected by anti-competitive behaviour outlined by this case could seek damages, which would be considered separately to the fine imposed on Google.
The publishers involved in the case argue they should collectively be awarded damages of more than €640m (£552m) due to the impact Google’s actions had on them.
They believe they would have earned significantly higher advertising revenues and paid lower fees for adtech services if not for the fact Google had created a less competitive market.
Publishers are taking part from the Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Hungary, Finland, the Netherlands, Poland and Sweden.
The case is being funded by Prague-based litigation funder LitFin, which will cover the costs even if it fails. The publishers involved have agreed to share part of any awarded damages with it if they win.
LitFin chief operating officer Matej Pardo said: “Google’s abuse of its position across the ad tech stack has been found unlawful at the highest levels – now it’s time for the publishers who bore the cost of that conduct to be made whole.
“By bringing a grouped claim, we can utilise efficiencies of scale to make this kind of action available to smaller players across Europe, who might otherwise not be in a position to bring a claim against such a deep-pocketed adversary as Google.”
The European Commission found that Google was dominant in the market for publisher ad servers with its service Double Click for Publishers, or DFP.
It was simultaneously dominant in the market for programmatic ad-buying tools for the open web through its services, Google Ads and DV360.
The Commission said that Google had favoured its own ad exchange AdX in the ad selection process run by DFP, for example by informing AdX of its competitors’ highest bids which it needed to beat to win the auction.
It also found that Google favoured AdX in the way Google Ads and DV360 placed bids on ad exchanges, for example by Google Ads avoiding other ad exchanges to primarily place bids on AdX and making it more attractive than competitors.
Both actions gave AdX a competitive advantage and meant it could potentially bid just a penny higher than any non-Google bid, keeping prices lower than they may otherwise have risen to.
Other cases have previously been started against Google. In 2024 a coalition of 32 European media groups including Axel Springer and Schibsted brought a claim for €2.3bn (£2bn) alleging they suffered losses due to Google’s digital advertising practices.
Earlier this year five US publishers – Penske, The Atlantic, McClatchy, Conde Nast and Vox Media – sued Google alleging “deceptive and manipulative” adtech practices.
Google said in response to that lawsuit: “These allegations are meritless. Advertisers and publishers have many choices and when they choose Google’s ad tech tools it’s because they are effective, affordable and easy to use.”
The US Department of Justice last year successfully proved Google had monopolised digital advertising markets on the open web and harmed its publisher customers as a result.
Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our “Letters Page” blog