The upcoming Department of Justice (DOJ) antitrust trial against Google, set to begin on September 9, is expected to highlight various internal Google code names that offer intriguing insights into the company’s ad tech operations. While the trial itself is focused on allegations against Google’s dealings with advertisers, publishers, and ad-tech competitors, the use of colorful code names such as Banksy, Bernanke, and Jedi Blue will likely feature prominently in court documents and proceedings.
Despite the whimsical nature of the code names, the trial’s core issues revolve around serious allegations of anticompetitive behavior. For instance, Google’s Project Polyjuice, referenced during a previous search antitrust trial, is named after a Harry Potter potion that changes appearances, metaphorically aligning with claims that Google’s Randomized Generalized Second-Price (RGSP) program manipulated search auction bids.
One notable code name is Project Narnia, which the DOJ claims involved Google’s efforts to consolidate user data across its various services like Google Search, Gmail, and YouTube. By combining user data into a single ID, Google allegedly strengthened its dominance in the ad tech sector. This consolidation, referred to as Narnia 2.0 in later stages, purportedly enhanced Google’s advertising tools by integrating user interests with additional data signals.
DOJ Antitrust Trial Against Google Set to Unveil Intriguing Code Names and Ad Tech Allegations
Another significant code name, Jedi Blue, emerged from a 2021 lawsuit and is tied to allegations that Google and Facebook collaborated to inhibit header bidding—a technology that allows multiple ad exchanges to compete for ad space. The DOJ suggests that this arrangement provided Facebook with favorable treatment while increasing ad prices significantly, an issue central to the trial.
Project Bernanke, named after the former Federal Reserve chairman, is accused of manipulating bids within Google’s AdX exchange. The DOJ argues that this project started in 2013, allowed Google to control more competitive transactions and hinder competitors, effectively maintaining its monopoly. Another related project, Global Bernanke, reportedly altered Google’s pricing structure based on the likelihood of publishers shifting to rival ad servers.
In response to competition, Google is alleged to have introduced Project Bell in 2014, which penalized publishers for not providing Google’s AdX early access to ad inventory. This project, according to the DOJ, protected Google’s market position by reducing bid prices for publishers who did not prioritize Google’s exchange, further insulating Google from competition.
Other code names like Project Poirot and Project Alchemist also feature in the legal filings. Project Poirot allegedly involved manipulating bids on rival exchanges to incentivize publishers to favor Google’s AdX. Meanwhile, Project Alchemist, introduced in 2019, reportedly aimed to adapt Google Ads to a new auction format while maintaining Google’s profit margins, illustrating ongoing efforts to navigate and influence ad auction dynamics.
Lastly, the use of code names like Banksy and Stonehenge suggests Google’s attempts to address potential remedies in response to various investigations. Banksy, named after the enigmatic street artist, was reportedly involved in developing solutions to mitigate legal risks and resolve regulatory challenges. As the trial unfolds, these code names and their associated projects will likely provide a deeper understanding of Google’s strategies and market behavior over the past decade.
