Google Won't Be Forced to Sell Its Ad Exchange Despite Losing Antitrust Case

A U.S. federal judge has sided with Google, ruling that the company won't be forced to sell its online ad exchange (formerly known as AdX). That was exactly what the Department of Justice had been pushing for in the drawn-out ad-tech case that Google lost in 2025. The penalty for that defeat, however, is shaping up to be minimal.

The DOJ and a coalition of states had tried to prove that Google, wielding enormous influence over the display-advertising market, was limiting competitors' reach and “rigging” ad auctions in its own favor. The court agreed that the company had illegally tied publishers to its exchange, but found no violations in the tools used by advertisers.

Despite the mixed ruling, at the remedies stage the DOJ insisted that a forced sale of the exchange was the best way to level the playing field. That won't happen. Although the exchange brings in a comparatively small share of Google's revenue, selling it could have triggered a chain reaction across the company's entire advertising business — and would have sent a loud signal to the big tech corporations that have lately been fending off antitrust suits with success.

Google isn't getting off entirely scot-free. Beyond selling the exchange, the government had asked for fines and court-ordered changes to business practices — and it will likely get a good portion of them. The details aren't known yet: Judge Leonie Brinkema sealed the ruling for 14 days, giving the parties a chance to request redactions. The exact nature of the sanctions will become clear in two weeks, but Google's lawyers can already celebrate.

Three defeats — almost no consequences

This is the third and last of the three antitrust cases against Google to reach a conclusion. And after an entire era of legal uncertainty, the company emerges practically unharmed.

The DOJ's second case, focused on search, also ended in a defeat for Google — but a year ago the government failed to convince the court to force the company to sell the Chrome browser. Google was ordered to open up its search data to competitors and to stop requiring partners to preinstall its apps on mobile devices. Given the threat of losing the world's most popular browser, the outcome turned out to be quite bearable for the company.

The third suit was brought by Epic Games, which accused Google of using its control over Android and the Play Store to suppress alternative app stores and keep prices high. Google lost this case too, though Epic didn't get everything: the sanctions are limited to U.S. territory, and Google retained app review for itself. Even so, this may be the case that changes the company's business more than any other: Google has already had to allow third-party stores, cut Play Store commissions, and let developers use alternative payment systems.

After years of hearings, appeals, and rulings, Google's market power remains almost intact. That leaves the company free to build new monopolies — now in the field of artificial intelligence — and the current DOJ doesn't seem especially inclined to stand in its way.

Source: Ars Technica