The lawsuit is Google's second such test this year after the California-based tech juggernaut saw a similar government demand to split up its empire shot down by a judge earlier this month.
Monday's case focuses specifically on Google's ad tech "stack" -- the tools that website publishers use to sell ads and that advertisers use to buy them.
In a landmark decision earlier this year, Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that Google maintained an illegal grip on this market.
Monday's trial is set to determine what penalties and changes Google must implement to undo its monopoly.
According to filings, the US government will argue that Google should spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations. The DOJ will also ask that after the divestitures are complete, Google be banned from operating an ad exchange for 10 years.
Google will argue that the divestiture demands go far beyond the court's findings, are technically unfeasible, and would be harmful to the market and smaller businesses.
"We've said from the start that DOJ's case misunderstands how digital advertising works and ignores how the landscape has dramatically evolved, with increasing competition and new entrants," said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's Vice President of Regulatory Affairs.
In a similar case in Europe, the European Commission, the EU's antitrust enforcer, earlier this month fined Google 2.95 billion euros ($3.47 billion) over its control of the ad tech market.
Brussels ordered behavioral changes, drawing criticism that it was going easy on Google as it had previously indicated that a divestiture may be necessary.
This remedy phase of the US trial follows a first trial that found Google operated an illegal monopoly. It is expected to last about a week, with the court set to meet again for closing arguments a few weeks later.
The trial begins in the same month that a separate judge rejected a government demand that Google divest its Chrome browser, in an opinion that was largely seen as a victory for the tech giant.
That was part of a different case, also brought by the US Department of Justice, in which the tech giant was found responsible for operating an illegal monopoly, this time in the online search space.
Instead of a major breakup of its business, Google was required to share data with rivals as part of its remedies.
The US government had pushed for Chrome's divestment, arguing the browser serves as a crucial gateway to the internet that brings in a third of all Google web searches.
Shares in Google-parent Alphabet have skyrocketed by more than 20 percent since that decision.
Judge Brinkema has said in pre-trial hearings that she will closely examine the outcome of the search trial when assessing her path forward in her own case.
These cases are part of a broader bipartisan government campaign against the world's largest technology companies. The US currently has five pending antitrust cases against such companies.
Amazon faces US trial over alleged Prime subscription tricks
Washington (AFP) Sept 22, 2025 -
Amazon goes to trial on Monday in a US government lawsuit that accuses the e-commerce giant of using tricks to enroll millions of customers in its Prime subscription service and then making it nearly impossible to cancel.
The Federal Trade Commission's complaint, filed in June 2023, alleges that Amazon knowingly used designs known as "dark patterns" to trick consumers into signing up for the $139-per-year Prime service during checkouts.
The case centers on two main allegations: that Amazon enrolled customers without clear consent through confusing checkout processes, and that it created a deliberately complex cancellation system internally nicknamed "Iliad" - after Homer's epic about the long, arduous Trojan War.
The case will be heard in a federal court in Seattle by Judge John Chun, who is also presiding over a separate FTC case that accuses Amazon of running an illegal monopoly, due to go to trial in 2027.
The cases are part of a volley of lawsuits launched against the big tech companies in recent years in a bipartisan effort to rein in the power of the US tech giants after years of government complacency.
According to court documents, Amazon was aware of widespread "nonconsensual enrollment" in Prime but resisted changes that would reduce these unwanted sign-ups because they negatively affected the company's revenue.
The FTC alleges that Amazon's checkout process forced customers to navigate confusing interfaces where declining Prime membership required finding small, inconspicuous links while signing up for the service was through prominent buttons.
Crucial information about Prime's price and automatic renewal was often hidden or disclosed in fine print, the FTC also alleges.
"For years, Amazon has knowingly duped millions of consumers into unknowingly enrolling in its Amazon Prime service," the original complaint states.
The service has become central to Amazon's business model, with Prime subscribers spending significantly more on the platform than non-members.
The lawsuit also targets Amazon's cancellation process, which required customers to navigate what the FTC describes as a "labyrinthine" four-page, six-click, fifteen-option process to cancel their membership.
The FTC is seeking penalties, monetary relief, and permanent injunctions requiring the company to change its practices.
The case in part relies on ROSCA, legislation that came into force in 2010 that specifically prohibits charging consumers for internet services without clear disclosure of terms, obtaining express consent, and providing simple cancellation mechanisms.
The FTC alleges Amazon violated these requirements by failing to clearly disclose Prime's terms before collecting billing information and by not obtaining genuine informed consent before charging customers.
Amazon's defense strategy will focus heavily on arguing that ROSCA and other regulations don't specifically prohibit the practices in question and that the FTC is stretching the law.
The company has also argued that it made improvements to its Prime enrollment and cancellation processes and that the allegations are out of date.
The jury trial is expected to last about four weeks and will largely rely on internal Amazon communications and documents as well as Amazon executives and expert witnesses.
If the FTC prevails, Amazon could face substantial financial penalties and be required to overhaul its subscription practices under court supervision.
Related Links
Satellite-based Internet technologies
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
| Subscribe Free To Our Daily Newsletters |
