Jump to content

Page:United States v Google 20240805.pdf/173

From Wikisource
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
Case 1:20-cv-03010-APM
Document 1033
Filed 08/05/24
Page 137 of 286

moment the consumer is looking to make a purchase. FOF ¶¶ 170–171; cf. United States v. Bazaarvoice, Inc., No. 13-cv-00133 (WHO), 2014 WL 203966, at *24 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2014) (distinguishing social commerce products from “rating and reviews” online platforms, because social commerce products do not “provide[] potential consumers with product-specific feedback from other consumers at the point of purchase” and “are often focused on brand advertising rather than driving the sale of individual products”).

The much-discussed golf-shorts example from trial, illustrated below, makes the same point.

A non-free image has been removed from this page.

PSXD10 at 25. The Instagram viewer of a golf-swing video (on the left) might not be in a buying frame of mind—they could just be interested in improving their golf swing. But even if the user were looking to make a purchase, or the video piqued their desire to do so, such interest could be directed to all manner of golf items—shoes, clubs, shirts, tee times, lessons, etc. Tr. at 6890:17–6891:23 (Amaldoss) (discussing PSXD10 at 25). By contrast, the user who enters “golf shorts” into Google is highly likely expressing an interest in buying golf shorts. Id. at 6891:24–6892:12 (Amaldoss) (discussing PSXD10 at 25). Delivering a search ad in response to directly expressed

169