Google owns web browser with monopoly market share.
Google uses product with monopoly market share to limit tools that allow a user to block ads that harms their other half...of which they are also a monopoly in.
There is a strong argument that they are using a monopoly to control and prevent users from choice to display or not display content, removing their choice to not see Google ads.
I'm not sure that any of this would ever have weight in the US...but it does feel off.
Google used billions of dollars from its online ad dominance to gain a monopoly in a different market via Chrome. Google is now using the latter monopoly to juice profits in the former, to the detriment of users.
Having the best product is not the same as monopoly. The switching costs of web browsers is as close to zero as is possible. Downloading opera, Firefox, brave, or any of the others is free and takes less than two minutes.
This isn't standard oil where you either buy oil from them or freeze.
I am thinking "A pattern of anti-competitive actions leveraging Google's control in multiple parts of the web ecosystem to limit competition." Will this fly in the US?