Google keeps both sides of the ad auction as Microsoft becomes next target

Alphabet's Google will not have to sell AdX, the advertising exchange where publishers pay the company a 20% fee to sell ads in auctions that clear the moment a user loads a page. Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, declined the Department of Justice's divestiture request and ordered conduct fixes instead, according to Reuters reporting carried by USA TODAY.

The full opinion stays sealed for 14 days to allow redactions. A short public order made the shape of the remedy clear, and both sides have 30 days to confer and file a jointly proposed final judgment.

The conduct remedies go further than they might sound. According to TechTimes, Google must stop giving AdX first look at every impression before rival exchanges can bid, a practice the ruling traced back to roughly 2010. It must stop letting AdX see the highest rival bid before submitting its own offer. Brinkema's earlier liability ruling described that practice, citing the Index Exchange complaint, as opening the sealed bid envelope before bidding. And it must scrap the 2019 Unified Pricing Rules, restoring publishers' ability to set different price floors for different buyers, as AdExchanger reported.

What did not change is the structure. Google keeps DoubleClick for Publishers, the dominant ad server, and AdX, the dominant exchange. It still runs the auction software and the data pipeline that tells both sides of the market how to price. That combination is what made the prohibited practices effective in the first place.

A remedy that leaves the machinery in place

Jay Friedman, co-founder of the ad-tech advisory firm CartographAI, testified for the DOJ at the remedies trial. He put the residual problem as a question to AdExchanger: "What is a web publisher to do if it wants to use a different ad server but still get Google's buy-side demand?" Real-time bid sharing is meant to answer that, but the market will settle the answer, not the courtroom.

The numbers behind the liability finding are not in dispute. Brinkema ruled in April 2025 that Google illegally monopolised two markets under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act: publisher ad servers, where it held roughly 91% of worldwide share by impressions served, and open-web display exchanges, where AdX charged a consistent 20% take rate for over a decade. She found Google tied the two together, using dependence on DFP to lock publishers into AdX and advertiser demand on AdX to lock them into DFP.

Google welcomed the outcome. "We're very pleased the Court rejected the DOJ's proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow," said executive Lee-Anne Mulholland. The DOJ said it was "pleased that the court ordered substantial relief" and was evaluating next steps.

AdX is not a large slice of Google's business. Ad Manager accounted for 4.1% of overall revenue and 1.5% of operating profit in 2020, according to Wedbush research cited by Reuters, with later figures redacted. Shares pared gains after the ruling and closed up 0.6%.

Third failed breakup bid, and a new front

This is the third time in recent years that US enforcers have asked a court to break up a Big Tech company and lost. A federal judge in Washington rejected the FTC's attempt to force Meta to sell Instagram and WhatsApp, a decision under appeal. Another judge who found Google illegally monopolised search declined to order a Chrome divestiture, citing competition from generative AI companies including OpenAI's ChatGPT.

Sacha Haworth, executive director of The Tech Oversight Project, said the rulings "prove that the courts alone will not save us from Big Tech." The group has proposed legislation aimed at digital advertising competition.

The next test may involve Microsoft. The Verge reported in June that the FTC sent civil investigative demands, similar to subpoenas, to at least half a dozen companies that compete with Microsoft, with questions focused on potentially exclusionary behaviour around Azure and the company's role in AI. The probe began under the Biden administration in 2024 and continued under President Donald Trump.

The documents run more than 15 pages and over 15 questions, often with extensive sub-parts, and ask about business agreements, licensing, interoperability, bundling, pricing and barriers to entry. Former FTC chair William Kovacic told The Verge the questions suggest the agency is working out which market players matter and how important bundling tactics are, with the AI references hinting at a possible tying arrangement.

Microsoft spokesperson Alex Haurek said the company is "cooperating fully with the FTC and believe our practices promote competition while delivering the innovative products our customers expect." He pointed to Google's cloud growth as evidence of competition.

No complaint is guaranteed. FTC staff will decide whether to recommend one, and the agency's two Republican commissioners will vote. With no minority commissioners in place, the probe could also end quietly, with nothing filed and nothing announced.