Mark Zuckerberg and Sundar Pichai personally oversaw an illegal deal that misled publishers and adve

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

advertisers, unredacted suit alleges

Google CEO Sundar Pichai and Meta chief exec Mark Zuckerberg personally signed off on an illegal advertising deal in 2018, according to newly unredacted US court filings that claim collusion at the very top of both firms.

According to the complaint, first filed by a coalition of states in 2020, the deal guaranteed that Facebook would both participate in and win a fixed percentage of Google's online ad auctions, in what the plaintiffs describe as an "illegal price-fixing agreement."

As Insider's Lara O'Reilly wrote in April, Google dominates how marketers buy ads, the tech which sites use to sell ads, and the exchange that connects the two. The suit alleges that Google used its dominant position and "exclusionary tactics" to distort competition in online ads.

Most of the allegations in the suit hinge on Google's fear of "header bidding," an alternative to its own ad auctioning practices described as an "existential threat" to the company.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/mark-zuckerberg-and-sundar-pichai-personally-oversaw-an-illegal-deal-that-misled-publishers-and-advertisers-unredacted-suit-alleges/ar-AASRF4m

[Farmer-Rick]

1. And this is just one technique used to

siphon off our national wealth into the pockets of a few greedy men.

Unregulated, free market, capitalism at its best....

[diane in sf]

2. Shared on FB, lol. Eom

[crickets]

3. Not surprised.

Question is, will there be consequences?

[BobTheSubgenius]

4. In the 90's, I was the GM of a long-distance reseller.

I had very serious and sincere hopes of righting the ship and making it into a credible organization, but....suffice to say the owner was backing Rudy in the early primary days during that time. I know that might seem like a non sequitur, but it makes sense to me.

Besides, that's not the point here...other than Micro-Managing, Bling-Craving, Today-I'm-Sure-He's-A-Magat POS owner did all kinds of biz with Google.

At the apex of the company, he was spending up to $1500 a DAY on Google ads. One small (in mass, not income - it sometimes grossed $100,000 a month) company in a backwater town like this paying that much? Their total rake must be incredible.

[GB_RN]

5. Zuckerberg Involved In Shady/Illegal Shit?

No way. After all, he's been a paragon of virtue in how he's run Feces...I mean...Facebook! 😂

Snark, for those who can't tell.

If I believed in a Devil/Satan or what-have-you, I'd certainly say that Fuckerberg had sold his soul to it, but nah, we're all responsible for our own choices and actions. So, all the evil that Julius Ceasar-lookin' shithead has done is all on him.

[Ford_Prefect]

6. "Billions and Billions..."

[Pinback]

7. New York Times coverage:

Google’s chief executive signed off on deal at center of antitrust case, states say.
- https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/14/technology/sundar-pichai-google-facebook-antitrust.html

By David McCabe
Jan. 14, 2022
Google’s chief executive approved an agreement with Facebook at the heart of an antitrust lawsuit that 16 states and Puerto Rico have lodged against the search giant, according to a portion of the complaint revealed on Friday.

The lawsuit, led by the Texas attorney general, Ken Paxton, argues that Google has obtained and abused a monopoly over the network of technology used to deliver ads online.

When publishers started using an alternative system for selling their ad space, Google worked to undermine it by creating a similar system that it controlled, according to the lawsuit. The states argue that Google reached a deal with Facebook to have the social network join its effort in an effort to “kill” the publishers’ competing plan.

In the newly unredacted portion of the lawsuit, filed in federal court, the states said Sundar Pichai, the company’s chief executive since 2015, “also personally signed off on the terms of the deal.”

The newly visible parts of the lawsuit also include details of programs that the states say Google used to mislead buyers and sellers of ad space about the precise nature of the auctions they were participating in, allowing Google to make more money in the process.

- More at link above.