A landmark antitrust ruling against Google’s advertising technology business has sent ripples through the digital media ecosystem after finding the tech giant liable for maintaining illegal monopolies. The decision targeted specific pillars of Google’s vast operation, potentially setting the stage for significant structural changes.
The ruling focused on Google’s publisher ad server DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP), its ad exchange AdX, and the practice of tying the two together, creating what the court deemed an anticompetitive advantage. While the verdict is in, the crucial question of remedies – what actions will be taken to address the findings – remains as yet unanswered, leaving the industry in a state of watchful anticipation.
For participants in the programmatic advertising market, the outcome could reshape competitive dynamics, according to Andrew Casale, president and CEO of Index Exchange.
Divestiture seen as likely remedy
Index Exchange competes with Google in the ad exchange arena. Casale, whose company operates on the sell-side connecting publishers with advertisers, testified during the trial, arguing Google’s integrated stack posed a threat to alternative systems like header bidding. The ruling, delivered following proceedings that concluded last year, largely centered on the significant market share held by Google’s tools, particularly DFP in display advertising.
Should divestiture be pursued as a remedy – a scenario Casale views as probable – specific guardrails would be essential, he argued. “In the event of a divestiture of either AdX or DFP, or both, there will have to be guidelines imposed on the divestiture that would prevent a reassembly,”Casale said in this video interview with Beet.TV’s Lisa Granatstein. This, he suggested, is crucial given the dominant market share of the assets involved, to prevent a recurrence of anticompetitive conditions.
Casale emphasized the ultimate goal should be fostering “a thriving and competitive marketplace that drives maximum value, ultimately, to publishers.” Analysts cited by Reuters also anticipate potential structural remedies, including divestiture, following the ruling which found Google’s ad network constitutes an illegal monopoly.
Alternatively, Casale suggested, significant operational changes requiring greater transparency and prohibiting any “black box” decisioning could be mandated if divestiture doesn’t occur.
Timeline for change remains uncertain
Reflecting on his participation in the trial, Casale admitted testifying was “one of the most intimidating experiences” but noted his appearance was compelled by a subpoena. “We are really proud of the work that we do in the market, on behalf of our customers,” he said. “And I think we had a lot of very valuable experiences to share in the trial that I hope played some small part in getting us to this point.”
Casale cautioned against expecting immediate market shifts. “I think if anything this has all happened pretty fast,” he observed. “If you kind of look at how fast the trial ran, to even get to this judgment, that’s pretty quick.” Google, for its part, reportedly plans to appeal the decision, according to reporting from Axios on internal company communications, potentially extending the timeline.
Potential appeals or settlement negotiations could mean significant delays before any remedies take effect. “It could still be years before we see any actual change,” Casale said. “Perhaps there’s a settlement that is established as well, that could shorten that time horizon. But I wouldn’t expect any change in the immediate, given how long these proceedings typically go.”
