The legal heat is intensifying around Google’s business practices, with Australian law firm Maurice Blackburn positioning itself at the forefront of what could become a major class action against the search engine behemoth.
Regulators worldwide are increasingly scrutinizing Big Tech’s market dominance and allegedly anticompetitive behaviors.
Australian Competition Landscape
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has been actively investigating Google’s search services, securing undertakings from all three major mobile network operators – Telstra, Optus, and TPG – regarding their agreements with Google.
These telco agreements had required Google’s search services to be pre-installed as the default search function on an exclusive basis on Android devices supplied by these carriers.
The ACCC’s investigation stems from findings that Google’s dominance as a default search engine contributes significantly to its market position, with strong consumer biases toward default settings playing a crucial role, mirroring concerns raised in the United States, where a federal judge found in August 2024 that Google operates as a monopolist in general search services and search text advertising markets.
Maurice Blackburn’s Publisher Class Action
Maurice Blackburn is spearheading efforts to launch a class action that could provide compensation to any website owner or app publisher that sold ads via programmatic channels over the past six years.
The firm’s approach targets what they describe as Google’s deceptive practices in digital advertising auctions, specifically focusing on two internal Google projects: “Bernanke” and “Jedi Blue”.
Project Bernanke allegedly involves Google manipulating advertiser fees by secretly running third-price auctions instead of the advertised second-price auctions, effectively reducing publisher revenues.
Project Jedi Blue represents Google’s alleged collaboration with Meta (Facebook) to undermine header bidding technology that could have increased publisher revenues.
According to Maurice Blackburn’s analysis, Google told advertisers it was running second-price auctions where the winning advertiser pays the second-highest bid plus one cent. However, the Department of Justice allegations suggest Google was secretly operating third-price auctions, significantly reducing publisher payouts.
Global Momentum Building
The Australian legal action follows similar movements worldwide, with an $8 billion Canadian class action already underway and funded by ASX-listed Omni Bridgeway.
Industry experts predict “a bloodbath of lawsuits being filed” globally, particularly if Google loses its adtech antitrust trial in the United States.
Jason Kint, a US publisher association chief, notes that regulators globally are operating as “a self-learning hive mind,” with investigations in Australia, Canada, the UK, EU, and Germany all informing each other’s approaches. The coordinated global response reflects the uniform nature of Google’s operations across jurisdictions.
Australian law offers several advantages for pursuing such actions. The Competition and Consumer Amendment (Misuse of Market Power) Act 2017 strengthened Australia’s antitrust laws, providing regulators with enhanced tools to tackle companies like Google. Additionally, Australia’s mature class action regime eliminates preliminary hurdles like class certification that exist in other jurisdictions.
Partner Jacqueline Downes from Allens explains that Google’s conduct becomes unlawful when it has “a substantial negative impact on competition” or “the purpose or effect of substantially lessening competition”.
While companies can compete on merit and innovation, exclusive arrangements that substantially lessen competition cross the legal line.
What This Means for Publishers
Any entity with a website or mobile app that has sold advertising programmatically over the last six years could potentially benefit from the proposed class action.
Maurice Blackburn is actively seeking to connect with affected publishers to understand the impacts of using Google’s platforms.
The firm emphasizes that publishers of all sizes – from small websites to major media companies – are “reliant on them,” highlighting the universal nature of Google’s market influence.
This dependency underscores the significance of the alleged anticompetitive practices and their potential impact on the digital advertising ecosystem.
The Australian action represents part of a broader global reckoning with Big Tech’s market power. The outcome of the US Department of Justice’s adtech antitrust trial, expected soon, could significantly influence the trajectory of similar actions worldwide.
