The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has finally made public a document that was described by Judge Amit Mehta as "embarrassing" during the Google search antitrust trial, a document that Google had sought to conceal.
This document contains meeting notes attributed to Google's vice president for finance, Michael Roszak, which he purportedly "created for a course on communications," as reported by Bloomberg. Within these notes, Roszak made a controversial statement, likening Google's search advertising to "one of the world's greatest business models ever created," suggesting that only certain "illicit businesses" such as those dealing in "cigarettes or drugs" could rival it.
During the trial, Roszak claimed that he couldn't recall if he had ever presented this material, stating that the course required him to convey statements that he didn't believe as part of the presentation. He further contended that the notes were rife with hyperbole and exaggeration and did not accurately represent his genuine beliefs because they lacked a legitimate business purpose.
Google had repeatedly objected to the document's inclusion in court proceedings, arguing its irrelevance to the DOJ's case. However, after Judge Mehta permitted the DOJ to present the document as evidence, Google attempted to seal off Roszak's testimony concerning the document, which Judge Mehta initially granted. Later, Judge Mehta expressed concern over this decision, stating that Google's request had placed him in a difficult position.
Judge Mehta informed Google that the document did not contain any confidential information and acknowledged its potentially embarrassing nature for the witness. Ultimately, Judge Mehta not only denied Google's request to redact portions of the document but also indicated his intention to unseal the portion of Roszak's testimony related to it.
In addition to drawing a controversial comparison between Google's advertising business and illicit markets, Roszak's notes also suggested that because users became highly reliant on Google's search engine, the company was able to disregard the demand side of economic principles and focus solely on the supply side, involving advertisers, ad formats, and sales. This aspect of the document likely held particular interest for the DOJ.
Part of the DOJ's argument in the case is that Google's search monopoly reduces its motivation to innovate products that protect consumers from issues like invasive data collection.
Google responded to this revelation by stating that Roszak's statements did not represent the company's opinion and were created for a public speaking class that encouraged hyperbolic and attention-grabbing statements. Google's spokesperson also noted that Roszak himself testified that he did not believe these statements to be true.
According to Bloomberg, Google's lawyer, Edward Bennett, characterized Roszak's notes as a form of "cosplaying Gordon Gekko," referencing a fictional character symbolizing corporate greed from the 1987 movie "Wall Street."
The issue of sharing Roszak's notes with the public led to an agreement between the DOJ and Google regarding the release of all trial exhibits. It was decided that, by 9 pm each trial day, Google or other third parties could raise objections to the DOJ posting trial exhibits, such as Roszak's notes, online. Otherwise, the DOJ could post these exhibits "as soon as it is reasonable to do so," as ruled by Judge Mehta.
留言