Tech exec says she doesn't trust Google, asks court to divest ad program

ALEXANDRIA, Va. (CN) — Stephanie Layser once tried to deal with Google. It was an uphill proposition.

The veteran ad tech executive remembered red-lining a contract and asking Google representatives for changes but getting no concessions. “I had no power to actually negotiate,” she recalled on the stand.

Layser, global industry specialist leader for monetization at Amazon and a veteran of News Corp, testified Friday during a trial to determine how Google will pay for antitrust violations in the operation of its ad tech business.

At one point during Layser’s testimony, U.S. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema, a Bill Clinton appointee, interrupted: “You don’t trust them, is that right?”

Layser confirmed that it was. Specifically, the wording in one legal document scared her, as it refers to Google customers “in good standing.”

“My experience with them is that they can decide almost anything not to be in good standing,” Layser said. “There’s always a moving target. There’s something I haven’t thought of yet. There’s a lever they can pull.”

Asked about possible remedies to restore the ad-tech market, Layser said she thought Google’s ad exchange should be divested.

She was called to testify by the U.S. Department of Justice, though Google attempted to exclude her testimony.

In court filings, the tech titan’s legal team argued she “has no personal knowledge of the technical feasibility of any of the proposed remedies in this case, as she has never examined Google’s source code and has no knowledge of Google’s technical infrastructure.”

Brinkema allowed Layser’s testimony over the objections. But later in the day, when an attorney for Google mentioned calling a rebuttal witness to counter Layser, Brinkema said, “She has strong views, but she’s not an expert witness.”

The judge is considering Justice Department proposals calling for the divestiture of Google’s ad products: AdX, an ad exchange, and DFP, DoubleClick for Publishers, an ad server. Google’s attorneys have advocated for more lenient behavioral and conduct remedies.

In April, Brinkema ruled Google violated antitrust laws in the operation of its ad tech business. Her decision found that the company’s conduct “substantially harmed Google’s publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web."

Jason Nieh, professor of computer science and co-director of the Software Systems Laboratory at Columbia University, offered a different view of Google.

In testimony that began Thursday and continued throughout the afternoon Friday, Nieh said that migrating the company’s source code would be an undertaking of unprecedented complexity with a high degree of uncertainty and no guarantee of success.

Under cross examination, Justice Department attorneys asked about the professor’s assertion that it would take at least five years to migrate the programs. Two other witnesses have said it could take less time. Nieh said his estimates are based on the complexity of the programs.

The trial is expected to conclude Monday.