Judge finds Google guilty of illegal monopoly in online ad markets, DOJ antitrust case advances

Alphabet’s advertising empire just took a major hit. A federal judge ruled Thursday that Google illegally dominated two key markets in online advertising, marking a significant win for the U.S. Department of Justice in its ongoing antitrust battle with the tech giant.

The ruling comes five months after the U.S. government urged a federal judge to break up parts of Google’s business, including its Chrome browser and Android OS, in a push that could reshape the structure of the tech giant.

Federal Court: Google Abused Monopoly Power in Digital Ads, Breakup Now on the Table

Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia found that Google violated antitrust laws by monopolizing the markets for publisher ad servers and ad exchanges—the platforms that serve as the bridge between advertisers and website publishers. She did not, however, agree with prosecutors’ claims that Google held a monopoly over advertiser ad networks.

This decision could put Google’s ad business in real jeopardy. The DOJ has argued that the company should be forced to sell off its Google Ad Manager, which includes both the ad server and the ad exchange—two products at the center of the case.

And this isn’t the only courtroom Google is dealing with right now. Next week, another federal judge in Washington will hear arguments in a separate case where the government is asking Google to spin off its Chrome browser and take steps to rein in its dominance in online search.

The Virginia ruling follows a three-week trial last year, during which prosecutors laid out a pattern of behavior that included buying up rivals, locking in clients, and controlling ad market transactions in ways that made it harder for competitors to gain ground.

Google pushed back, saying the lawsuit focuses on outdated practices. Its legal team argued that the company has since improved interoperability with rival tools, and that prosecutors are ignoring serious competition from players like Amazon and Comcast, especially as ad spending shifts to mobile apps and streaming.

The DOJ’s case was filed alongside a coalition of states that also accused Google of building a digital advertising monopoly by stacking the deck in its own favor.

Reuters previously reported that Google had already explored the idea of selling off parts of its ad business to satisfy European regulators. With this ruling, similar discussions in the U.S. may no longer be optional.

Meanwhile, the Justice Department’s lawsuit came after years of criticism that Google’s outsized role in digital advertising created a conflict of interest, controlling both the tools advertisers use to place ads and the platforms publishers use to sell space. Prosecutors argued that Google used this position to box out competition and entrench its dominance.

Judge Leonie Brinkema agreed with that core argument. In her 115-page opinion, she wrote that Google’s practice of tying its ad server and publisher ad exchange gave the company the ability to “establish and protect its monopoly power in these two markets,” CNN reported.

That part of the case could now force Google to break off parts of its ad business.

Still, Brinkema didn’t back every government claim. She dismissed the argument that Google held monopoly power in the advertising ad networks.

Reacting to the mixed ruling, Google’s Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, said: “We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half.”

“The Court found that our advertiser tools and our acquisitions, such as DoubleClick, don’t harm competition,” she added. “We disagree with the Court’s decision regarding our publisher tools. Publishers have many options, and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable, and effective.”