2 ms·
You only have access to non-Google bids, which makes it impossible to have enough information to know if the auction is unfair. Google is the final arbiter of w
by p49k 5y ago
You only have access to non-Google bids, which makes it impossible to have enough information to know if the auction is unfair. Google is the final arbiter of what ad gets shown, Google does not disclose its own bid if it's the winner, and you have to trust Google that it did not improperly advantage itself in the auction (which the complaint reveals that it did in fact advantage itself).
- londons_explore 5y ago> Google does not disclose its own bid if it's the winner Citation needed. See https://developers.google.com/authorized-buyers/rtb/downloads/realtime-bidding-proto https://developers.google.com/authorized-buyers/rtb/download... The "minimum_bid_to_win" field of the BidResponse message contains this info for all first price auctions.
- p49k 5y agoThis protobuf spec is in no way relevant to the situation outlined in the anti-competitive behavior complaint. The protobuf spec is related to using the Authorized Buyers RTB protocol within AdX. That's an ecosystem that lives entirely within Google itself, so there's no reason Google would want to disadvantage anyone since people using this are already essentially paying Google for the privilege. What the lawsuit is referring to is header-bidding, where an auction occurs client-side (or server-side using an O/O server endpoint) and the result is passed to GAM for competition via Dynamic Allocation. Google is being accused of trying to kill header bidding (because data is shared and profits are earned outside of Google's ecosystem), not their own RTB products.