Can Google be trusted without a break up?
- Google’s trustworthiness is being questioned by Judge Leonie Brinkema during a trial over allegations of ad tech misconduct.
- The DOJ argues that Google has not acted in good faith, citing examples of employees allegedly using chat messages to avoid leaving certain practices.
- Brinkema’s question about whether she should issue a strict order modifying Google’s behavior suggests that trust is the key issue at hand.
- The trial comes after last year’s Google trial, where the DOJ presented similar allegations and Brinkema presided over the proceedings.
- The outcome of this trial will determine whether Google can be trusted to act in good faith without strict oversight from the government.
On day three of the two-week remedies trial in the Justice Department’s ad tech case against Google, Judge Leonie Brinkema boiled down the argument to one key issue: trust. Brinkema interrupted testimony from a DOJ expert with a hypothetical: should she issue a strict order modifying Google’s behavior, could it resolve the issues at hand if “you had confidence that Google would actually act in complete good faith?”
The question felt particularly pointed, given how the Google trial Brinkema presided over last year unfolded. Over three weeks, the DOJ repeatedly presented examples of Google employees allegedly using chat messages to avoid leav …
Read the full story at The Verge.
Q. What was the key issue discussed by Judge Leonie Brinkema during the Google trial?
A. Trust.
Q. What did Judge Brinkema ask a DOJ expert about in her hypothetical scenario?
A. Whether she should have confidence that Google would act in complete good faith.
Q. In what context did Judge Brinkema bring up the issue of trust?
A. During the Justice Department’s ad tech case against Google, specifically on day three of the two-week remedies trial.
Q. What was the DOJ trying to achieve by presenting examples of Google employees allegedly using chat messages to avoid leaving certain practices?
A. To demonstrate that Google had not acted in complete good faith and needed to be modified.
Q. How long did the Google trial presided over by Judge Brinkema last year unfold?
A. Over three weeks.
Q. What was the main argument presented by the DOJ during the trial?
A. That Google had not acted in complete good faith, leading to issues at hand.
Q. Who interrupted testimony from a DOJ expert with a hypothetical question about trust?
A. Judge Leonie Brinkema.
Q. What did Judge Brinkema’s hypothetical scenario imply?
A. That if she could have confidence that Google would act in complete good faith, it might resolve the issues at hand.
Q. Why was the issue of trust particularly pointed during the trial?
A. Given how the previous Google trial unfolded and the DOJ’s repeated examples of Google employees allegedly using chat messages to avoid certain practices.
Q. What is the Justice Department’s ad tech case against Google focused on?
A. Resolving issues related to Google’s behavior, specifically whether it has acted in complete good faith.