Ad Tech Briefing: A Google breakup sounds ideal, but the realities are much more complicated

But liability doesn’t guarantee a radical overhaul — or even a speedy one.

Unfortunately, Digiday wasn’t in the courtroom (we’ve got day jobs) but we’ve been trading notes with people who were plus following the daily coverage from The Monopoly Report and from the Check My Ads team. Below is a breakdown of what really happened, what matters and what to keep an eye on as the case barrels toward resolution.

The DOJ’s remedy blueprint

The DOJ is pushing aggressively. Its core proposal is a three-phase structural remedy that aims to pry Google’s grip off the plumbing of ad tech. Key elements:

• Force real-time access to AdX bidding data via Prebid (i.e., level the playing field)  
• Open-source Google’s auction logic (i.e., the “brains” behind DFP)  
• Ban Google from operating an ad exchange for a decade post-divestiture  
• Place 50 % of net AdX/DFP revenue into escrow while separation proceeds  
• Require Google to share DFP data via an independent auction  

In short: structural breakups, data escrow, real-time access, and enforced divestiture. That’s a far more aggressive posture than mere behavioral “tweaks” — the outcome of the parallel search antitrust trial earlier this year, which disappointed so many.

But Google has mounted a fierce pushback. Its counterarguments rest on two themes:

1. Innovation paralysis – the DOJ’s plan would enmesh Google in court oversight for years, freezing product decisions and undermining its ability to evolve.  

2. Disproportionate harm — breaking apart tightly integrated tools will allegedly hurt publishers (especially smaller ones) and drive up ad costs.

Google is also subtly leaning on precedent: in the search antitrust case, Judge Mehta declined to force divestiture of Chrome or Android, signaling skepticism of heavy structural remedies. Google is banking that Brinkema will heed that logic.

What the industry wants

The publisher-side, which has long been a vocal critic of Google’s dominance, has mixed expectations.

On one hand, there is cautious optimism: many believe that forcing Google to shed AdX or open DFP access could unlock more competition. But on the other hand, many publishers doubt that any remedy will arrive in time.

One recurring critique is that by the time the court’s order (if strong) takes effect, the damage from shifting traffic patterns, AI Overviews undercutting referral traffic, and platform dominance may be irreversible. As one commentator put it: “it still matters, if it still matters” — i.e., the industry might have moved on.  

Another tension: some publishers fear that radical restructuring could create more instability than it solves, especially for operations that rely on the status quo of Google’s stack.  

Meanwhile, rival ad exchanges (e.g., Magnite, OpenX, PubMatic) have already filed suits seeking damages, hoping a strong remedy will indirectly validate their status as victims of Google’s dominance.   But they also face the risk of overplaying their hand: if the court orders only limited changes, those suits may be moot.

Potential outcomes 

Structural divestiture is possible — but not assured

The DOJ laid down an ambitious roadmap. If Judge Brinkema views Google’s dominance as deeply embedded and the risk of stasis too high, she might favor radical intervention. But she could also opt for a middle path: carve out only parts of the system or impose tough behavioral remedies first.

Delay and appeals will eat much of the impact

Even in the best case, disentangling Google’s tightly interwoven stack will take years. Coupled with inevitable appeals, the real-world effects may lag. Many observers already worry that by the time remedies materialize, the open web may be too scratched, too fractured, and too consumed by walled gardens and AI interfaces to benefit meaningfully.  

A ‘hybrid’ fix

A likely play: partial divestitures plus strong guardrails, data access mandates, an independent technical oversight committee, and staged transitions rather than wholesale teardown. That allows her to balance “justice delivered” with mitigation of undue collateral harm.

The search ruling looms large as precedent

The Mehta decision — where Google escaped breakup — is fresh in the mix. While antitrust observers expect the ad tech case to have a higher bar for divestiture, judges often hesitate to upset too much. Google will hammer home that logic.  

Remedies might not matter if the landscape is already mutating.

The open web is under assault from AI, retail media, zero-click models, and platform monopolies. So even if the court orders Google to shed parts of AdX or open DFP, the broader market may have already realigned beyond repair. In that scenario, the remedies might become symbolic rather than transformative.  

The remedies phase is the moment that might either vindicate the DOJ’s bold bet — or expose the limits of courtroom engineering in tech markets already shifting underfoot.

According to Digiday sources, the most likely outcome is a hybrid remedy: Google will be forced to loosen core control (Open-source logic, data access rules, escrow, structural carveouts), but full divestiture of its ad exchange or server tools is a coin flip. That said, timing and execution are the real wildcards. Even the best engineering can’t claw back lost traffic, community, and trust once the industry has moved on.

What we’ve heard

“Going private buys IAS time to gut the product, rebuild around AI, and make risky bets without Wall Street breathing down its neck. Expect major changes in the next 18-24 months. The question is whether it’ll be enough.”

— U of Digital’s take on Integral Ad Science being taken private 

Numbers to know

Where is AI driving the most business value, according to results from a recent Ocient survey?

• 46%: Risk management & compliance
• 43%: Customer experience & engagement
• 41%: Decision making
• 40%: Operations & efficiency (implied continuation from the original sequence)

What we’ve covered

CTV’s reseller reckoning, moving past scale on paper, confusion in practice

Years of euphoric growth has given way to a wave of hard questions from advertisers. They want to know who actually owns the inventory. 

Advertising Week Briefing: AWNY distills the industry’s existential drift

Another industry event, another round of panels framed by uncertainty. It’s the one constant in a stretch of years defined by volatility — economic, political and technological — all of which have reshaped how marketers operate.

What we’re reading

Mozilla taps Index Exchange as first programmatic partner 
Mozilla is bringing programmatic advertising to Firefox through a partnership with Index Exchange.

Can publishers trust The Trade Desk’s new wrapper?
In August, Prebid.org made the controversial decision to nix universal Transaction IDs – which advertisers use to track ad transactions across multiple SSPs – in favor of providing unique TIDs for each seller.

Salesforce challenger Zeta Global is making its biggest-ever acquisition
Zeta Global continues to mark its expansion with the $325 million purchase of Marigold.