Virginia. Google is confronting a new antitrust trial, a month after a judge deemed its search engine a monopoly. This latest case focuses on Google's dominance in online advertising technology, with the Justice Department and several states arguing that the tech giant has monopolized the market for matching publishers with advertisers.

The government's case centers on Google's control over both the buy and sell sides of online advertising, which allegedly allows it to retain up to 36 cents of every dollar in transactions. The prosecution argues that Google's monopoly extends to ad exchanges, which facilitate transactions between buyers and sellers.

Justice Department lawyer Julia Tarver Wood emphasized the severity of the situation, stating, “One monopoly is bad enough. But a trifecta of monopolies is what we have here.”

Google counters that the government's perspective is outdated, reflecting a time when desktop computers were the primary means of internet access. Google's lawyer, Karen Dunn, dismissed the case as a relic, likening it to "a time capsule with a Blackberry, an iPod, and a Blockbuster video card."

Dunn also cautioned that any action against Google could unintentionally benefit other tech giants like Amazon, Microsoft, and TikTok, rather than aiding small businesses. She pointed out that Google's ad revenue has been stable, with only a slight decline from $31.7 billion in 2021 to $31.3 billion in 2023.

The trial, which started Monday, will be decided by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, known for her work on high-profile terrorism cases and patent disputes. Originally set as a jury trial, it was converted to a bench trial after Google paid over $2 million to remove the jury requirement.

The Virginia trial follows a significant defeat for Google in Washington, D.C., where a judge declared its search engine a monopoly. Additionally, a December ruling labeled Google's Android app store a monopoly.

In the D.C. case, the judge has yet to decide on remedies. The proposed sanctions could potentially restrict Google's exclusivity agreements, which ensure its search engine remains the default choice for many users.

Peter Cohan, a Babson College professor, suggested that the Virginia trial could have more severe consequences for Google. "Divestitures are definitely a possible remedy for this second case," Cohan said. "It could be potentially more significant than initially meets the eye."

The government's witnesses are expected to include executives from major newspaper publishers like The New York Times and Gannett. They argue that Google's fees have harmed publishers by reducing their ad revenue and forcing them to increase ads or place more content behind paywalls.

Gannett executive Tim Wolfe testified that the company feels compelled to use Google's ad tech despite high fees, as it cannot afford to lose access to Google's large advertiser base.

Google disputes claims of excessive fees, arguing that its integrated ad technology improves performance and security. The company also highlights that customers have alternatives to its ad services.

The trial, set to last several weeks, is being held in a courthouse with strict rules, including a ban on cellphones, which limits real-time reporting from the tech press.