US court rules Google will not have to sell ad exchange after

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Judge Leonie Brinkema has sealed the order for 14 days, giving the parties a chance to request redactions. So we’ll know the exact nature of the remedies in two weeks, but Google’s legal team will undoubtedly be celebrating today.

Three losses, little consequence This is the third of three Google antitrust cases to reach a conclusion. While there still may be some legal wrangling over the exact nature of the advertising remedies, Google is emerging from this era of legal uncertainty largely unscathed.

The government asserted that Google held an 87 percent share of the ad-sales tech market. Brinkema ruled in April last year that Google violated antitrust law by forcing publishers that host ads on the company's servers to use AdX.

Google has faced scrutiny elsewhere over AdX and other ad-sales tools. Last September, the European Union's executive arm fined it $3.5 billion after determining it gave its ad tech products preferential treatment.

That same month, a district judge ruled that Google would not have to sell Chrome after previously determining the company held a monopoly in online search.