The digital advertising landscape could undergo a seismic shift this fall as the U.S. Department of Justice pursues an unprecedented breakup of Google's advertising technology business. Following a ruling that found Google illegally monopolized key segments of online advertising, both sides are preparing for a high-stakes showdown that will determine whether the tech giant's dominance in digital ads will remain intact or be fundamentally dismantled.
The September Showdown
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema has set September 22, 2025, as the trial date to determine appropriate remedies following last month's ruling against Google. The court previously found that Google unlawfully maintained monopoly power by tying its publisher ad server—software that helps websites manage and sell ad space—with its ad exchange, where advertisers bid for that space. This practice was deemed harmful to publishers, competitors, and consumers by restricting competition and effectively locking publishers into Google's ecosystem.
DOJ's Breakup Plan
The Department of Justice has confirmed its intention to pursue a structural remedy that would force Google to divest key components of its advertising technology business. The proposed approach would begin with Google providing real-time access to bidding data from its ad exchange to rival publisher ad servers. However, the ultimate goal is far more dramatic: compelling Google to sell off both its ad exchange and publisher ad server businesses entirely.
Google's Fierce Opposition
Google has vehemently rejected the DOJ's breakup plan, arguing that the demands exceed the court's findings and lack legal foundation. Karen Dunn, Google's lead attorney, described the forced divestiture as very likely completely impossible and warned it would cause serious complications, including the potential loss of important privacy and security protections. The company has also raised questions about whether there are suitable buyers capable of operating such complex ad technology systems outside of major tech companies.
Alternative Remedies
Instead of a breakup, Google has proposed behavioral remedies, including sharing a limited subset of advertising data with competitors and ending certain anticompetitive pricing practices like unified pricing. The company has also pledged not to reinstate discontinued tactics such as last look, which previously allowed Google to outbid rivals at the last moment. To ensure compliance, Google suggested appointing a court monitor, though Judge Brinkema appeared skeptical of this approach during the hearing.
Narrower Than Initially Sought
It's worth noting that the court's ruling was narrower than what the DOJ initially pursued. While finding Google monopolized publisher-side ad tech, the court did not conclude that Google held a monopoly over advertiser-facing tools. This distinction has narrowed the scope of potential remedies, though the DOJ maintains that leaving Google with control over 90 percent of publishers is too dangerous for the competitive landscape.
Broader Antitrust Challenges
This advertising technology case represents just one front in Google's ongoing antitrust battles. The company faces similar challenges regarding its search business dominance and ownership of Chrome, the leading browser on both desktop computers and Android phones. Judge Amit Mehta is expected to rule on remedies in the search case by August, while litigation over Google's Play Store policies continues separately. Collectively, these cases could lead to unprecedented structural changes for one of the world's most powerful technology companies.
Industry Implications
The outcome of the September trial could reshape the digital advertising ecosystem that underpins much of the internet economy. A breakup of Google's advertising technology stack would create new opportunities for competitors but might also introduce challenges related to interoperability, privacy, and security. For publishers and advertisers who have long operated within Google's dominant ecosystem, any transition would likely require significant adjustments to their business models and technical implementations.
 |
|---|
| The Google search homepage on a smartphone, representing the digital ecosystem under scrutiny in the upcoming trial |