Google dodges another breakup attempt

A judge previously determined that Google illegally monopolized a pair of ad tech markets. Google won't be forced to sell its ad exchange following antitrust ruling. Big Tech Google Google won't be forced to sell its ad exchange following antitrust ruling A judge previously determined that Google illegally monopolized a pair of ad tech markets.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) asked Judge Leonie Brinkema to force the company to sell AdX after she ruled last year that Google broke the law to monopolize two ad tech markets. Brinkema rejected that request in a ruling on Wednesday. The judge did accept undisclosed "behavioral remedies" that the parties offered.

According to Bloomberg, that involves Google having to open up its ad tech tools to rivals. Brinkema's decision was issued under seal to allow the parties time to review it and request any necessary reactions. "We're very pleased the Court rejected the DOJ's proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow," Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, said in a statement.

Publishers use AdX to sell unused ad space to advertisers in real time, right as a user loads a web page. They pay Google a 20 percent fee to do so. The DOJ and eight states sued Google in 2023, claiming the company used its monopoly position to charge higher fees and facilitate a higher proportion of ad sales.

US District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema declined the Justice Department's request to make Google sell off parts of its ad tech business, accepting milder remedies to restore competition to markets it illegally monopolized for years. Brinkema said she would adopt most of the behavioral changes proposed by the parties, with some modifications.

The DOJ proved to the court that Google acted illegally, but it won't get the big win it wanted. US court rules Google will not have to sell ad exchange after losing antitrust case.

But those won't […]. Google dodges another breakup attempt.

Text settings Story text Size Small Standard Large Width * Standard Wide Links Standard Orange * Subscribers only Learn more Minimize to nav A US federal judge has sided with Google, ruling that the company will not have to sell its online advertising exchange (previously known as AdX). The US Department of Justice (DOJ) sought this remedy in the long-running ad tech antitrust trial, which Google lost in 2025.

Policy Tech Antitrust Google dodges another breakup attempt Google stymied competition for ad tech services for years, the judge previously ruled. Google stymied competition for ad tech services for years, the judge previously ruled.

The remedies imposed upon Google for that loss are shaping up to be minimal. In this case, the DOJ and a coalition of states sought to prove that Google leveraged its immense market power in online display ads to reduce the reach of competitors.

Google redux: all the news from the ad tech trial see all updates Lauren Feiner is a senior policy reporter at The Verge, covering the intersection of Silicon Valley and Capitol Hill. She spent 5 years covering tech policy at CNBC, writing about antitrust, privacy, and content moderation reform.

Government lawyers argued that Google had “rigged” ad auctions to give itself an advantage. While the court agreed that Google illegally locked publishers into using its exchange, it did not agree that Google had broken the law when it came to the tools used by advertisers.

But those won’t become public until the parties meet to work out any additional proposed revisions and to review the judge’s opinion for confidential information that must be redacted. They could include proposals like restricting Google from using self-preferencing ad auction tactics or letting third-party ad tech tools access the same real-time information as Google.

Despite the mixed ruling, the DOJ argued during the remedy phase that forcing Google to sell its ad exchange, which facilitates connections between ad buyers and sellers, was the best way to level the playing field. While the ad exchange represents a relatively small part of Google’s revenue, forcing the company to sell may have sent ripple effects through the rest of its ad business.

Once the final opinion comes out, Google can decide to appeal Brinkema’s underlying decision ruling it an illegal ad tech monopoly, as it recently did for a separate judgement that it had monopolized the online search market. In that case, Judge Amit Mehta also declined to go as far as a breakup, opting instead for Google to share data with competitors and alter its behavior.

It would also have been a powerful message to Big Tech firms, which have successfully knocked back a recent wave of antitrust cases. That doesn’t necessarily mean Google gets off scot-free.

In the ad tech case, the DOJ successfully argued that Google had illegally monopolized the markets for publisher ad servers — where publishers can manage ad space for sale on their sites — and ad exchanges, which facilitate the auctions through which that ad space is sold. The judge agreed that Google had illegally tied its publisher ad server, Doubleclick for Publishers (DFP), and AdX ad exchange together in an anticompetitive manner that made it nearly impossible for customers to leave, degrading any competition.

While divesting the ad exchange would have been the most serious penalty, the government also asked for fines and court-ordered changes to Google’s business practices. It’s likely that the DOJ will get a lot of that, but we don’t know the specifics yet.