Raptive, an advertising-sales company representing thousands of websites (content publishers), filed a 93-page complaint against Google in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suit says "Google has carried out a sophisticated, anticompetitive, and deceptive scheme for well over a decade" by "manipulating auctions for ad space across the Internet."
Raptive alleges that Google has illegally monopolized the digital advertising market for over a decade through a series of systematic, anticompetitive, and deceptive schemes. Raptive alleges Google systematically rigged ad auctions by leveraging its multiple roles in the ad-tech stack (as a publisher ad server, an ad exchange, and an advertiser buying tool). The complaint claims Google traded on inside information to depress the prices paid to publishers, notably through programs like "Project Bernanke" and "Minimum Bid to Win," which gave its own ad exchange an unfair advantage over rivals.
Google allegedly tied its publisher ad server, DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP), to its ad exchange, AdX, effectively forcing publishers to use DFP to access real-time bids on AdX and locking out competing ad servers. The complaint focuses on Google's use of Enhanced Dynamic Allocation (EDA), which forced publishers to make all inventory available to AdX. Google would then allegedly convert prices from a publisher's direct deals into artificially low "temporary" cost-per-mille (CPM) floors, allowing AdX to win impressions for just one penny above that artificially depressed price. The lawsuit alleges Google concealed its anti-competitive actions from publishers and misrepresented that it did not use confidential publisher data (such as rival bids entered into DFP) to inform its own bidding. Internal communications allegedly warned against disclosing these proprietary programs.
Raptive seeks substantial monetary damages, running into the billions of dollars. Under federal antitrust law (the Clayton Act), successful plaintiffs can be awarded treble damages (three times the actual damages suffered) for willful monopolization. The suit also seeks punitive damages for the common-law fraud claims.
Raptive v. Google -> "According to the 93-page filing, Raptive contends that "Google has carried out a sophisticated, anticompetitive, and deceptive scheme for well over a decade" by "manipulating auctions for ad space across the Internet." The New York-based company manages… https://t.co/jmpmd034D3
— Glenn Gabe (@glenngabe) November 1, 2025
1. Raptive suing Google is a HUGE deal for small publishers harmed by Google's monopoly
— Nate Hake (@natejhake) November 1, 2025
2. Justice will take time, but this case should move quicker than most because Raptive can rely on Judge Brinkema's findings of fact regarding Google's conduct https://t.co/dNF50rYKrB
Will Raptive win? I don't know. More likely a settlement if anything...
Forum discussion at X.
