A federal judge has ordered Google to cease practices that reduce revenue for web publishers, stopping short of forcing the technology giant to dismantle its advertising technology business. The ruling follows a previous finding that Google violated U.S. antitrust laws by unlawfully maintaining monopoly power in the open web display advertising market.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, in an order released Wednesday, decided against requiring Google to sell AdX, the exchange where publishers pay the company a 20 percent fee for selling advertisements on their websites. Instead, she mandated "behavioral remedies" – a set of rules for Google's operations, the full details of which are expected in 14 days. Brinkema indicated she accepted most of the parties' proposed behavioral remedies.
The U.S. Department of Justice, which initiated the lawsuit, stated it was "pleased that the court ordered substantial relief" and is evaluating its next steps. Google expressed satisfaction that the court rejected the DOJ's proposal to break apart tools used by small businesses to reach customers.
The decision is anticipated to increase revenue for publishers, including news organizations that have faced financial challenges due to declining digital advertising and the rise of AI. This development marks a significant point in a long-standing legal dispute concerning Google's dominance over open web display advertising, the ads that appear on web pages.
Historically, Google's control over the ad tech market has allowed it to collect a substantial fee on advertising transactions. The Department of Justice and attorneys general from over a dozen states filed suit against Google in January 2023. A trial in 2024 examined the Google tools used by publishers to sell ad space and by advertisers to purchase it.
Government prosecutors argued that Google controlled both sides of the market, owning platforms for sellers, buyers, and the AdX exchange where transactions occur. Witnesses from media organizations, including The Daily Mail and Gannett, testified that Google's practices deprived news organizations of potential revenue and that they had limited alternatives to using Google's advertising technology despite its cost.
In April of the previous year, Brinkema had ruled that certain components of Google's system, specifically AdX and the publisher ad-selling technology, constituted an illegal monopoly. She found that Google unlawfully constrained publishers into using AdX, concluding that the company's conduct had "substantially harmed Google's publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web."
Google has stated its intention to appeal that ruling. Last year, further proceedings addressed the remedies sought by the DOJ, which included divesting AdX and granting competitors access to the auction technology's code. Google contended that a forced sale would be technically complex, harm customers, and represent government overreach.
This case is part of a broader government effort to address the market dominance of major technology companies. It is the second time a federal judge has ruled Google held an illegal monopoly in a business segment, following a previous ruling on Google's online search practices by Judge Amit Mehta. In that instance, Mehta also declined to force a breakup of a company division, rejecting the DOJ's bid to have Google sell its Chrome browser.
The European Commission has also fined Google for breaches of EU antitrust rules in the ad tech industry, and other lawsuits seeking financial damages for Google's antitrust conduct are ongoing from publishers and competitors. A separate trial in Texas concerning Google's digital advertising practices was previously halted pending the outcome of the Virginia case.