Google Won’t Have to Sell its Ad Business - DTNS 5345

**Tom Merritt** (0:08)
This is the Daily Tech News for Wednesday, September 2nd, 2026 We tell you what you need to know, give you some important context and help each other understand.

**Sarah Lane** (0:16)
Today, Google will not have to sell off any of its ad business.

**Tom Merritt** (0:20)
Ah, good for them. I mean, for them, just for them. I'm Tom Merritt.

**Sarah Lane** (0:26)
Poor Google. I'm Sarah Lane.

**Tom Merritt** (0:28)
We all feel so bad for them. Let's start with what you need to know with that big story.
Yeah, this one's going on for a couple of years now. US. District Judge Leonie Brinkma issued her decision for remedies in the antitrust case against Google's advertising exchange. This is one of the two big US antitrust cases. There was the one about search. This is the one about Google's practice of selling ads. Trial began in September 2024 Oh, so long ago.
The trial concluded in April 2025 The remedy hearing started this past May. And here we are just two years later with that remedy decision. How are they going to remedy the fact that Judge Brinkma found that Google abused its market position in ad markets for ad exchanges and ad servers? These are the technologies that help websites sell ad space and then determine where those ads are going to be placed all over the web.
Google tightly integrated its double-click-for-publishers ad server with ad exchange, its ad exchange, ad ex, which the judge had said enabled the company, and I'm quoting now, to establish and protect its monopoly power in these two markets. Google was not found to have abused its position in tools to purchase ad displays. So what do they have to do as a result? We don't know. We do know that Google will not have to divest any of its ad businesses.
However, and I'm going to quote again, most of the parties proposed behavioral remedies as modified by this court be and are accepted. In other words, most of the stuff that the Department of Justice was asking for, they're going to get, just not the divestment of any businesses. A full decision with redactions will be released later this month, and we'll get some more details. But apparently Google convinced the court that making some of these changes public would reveal trade secrets, so that'll be interesting. It is being reported as a win for Google, but either Google or the US Department of Justice may appeal the case. So all those headlines you saw years ago saying that Google would be broken up, they might have to sell Chrome or Android or their ad business have not yet proven to be true.

**Sarah Lane** (2:41)
Yeah, we talked about this quite a bit over the last few years, sort of wondering, what is the worst case scenario for Google? You know, spinning off Android, spinning off its ad business, spinning off Chrome. None of that has come to fruition. I sort of wonder what the redactions were in the full decision. Google saying like, hey, it's trade secrets, right? So that kind of makes sense. This is definitely a good win for Google.
But as you mentioned, Tom, what changes is not clear at this point.
It's sort of like Google was found to be negligent, I guess, you know, as far as...

**Tom Merritt** (3:23)
Abusing their monopoly position. So antitrust, violation of antitrust.

**Sarah Lane** (3:27)
Yeah. So there's that. So it wasn't as if a judge said, everything's cool, Google. You just go on with your bad self.
But it is unclear what we're going to see change going forward.

**Tom Merritt** (3:42)
I mean, I'm interested in what got redacted. I mean, I used the term trade secrets. Google didn't use it. So I'm not sure what the actual justification for the redactions are, which I guess we won't know because they're redacted. But yeah, it'll be...
The proof will be in the pudding that we get to see, but we will not get to see all the pudding.

**Sarah Lane** (4:03)
No. Although I like pudding.

**Tom Merritt** (4:05)
Pudding's delicious.

**Sarah Lane** (4:06)
Pudding is good. Pudding is good. You know who else is good, Tom?

**Tom Merritt** (4:10)
Who?

**Sarah Lane** (4:11)
DTNS is made possible by all the listeners who may or may not like pudding. We want to thank everybody who supports us, and especially today, Tim Deputy, Brandon Brooks, Simon Daniel Jerk, Daniel Jerk rather, and Luke Perrier. We also have some new patrons, and we love those.
We got AKMZ, Madeleine, Shane, Mattusas, David, William, Josephat, Zach, Hank, and Helsinki. And by the way, if I mispronounce any of your names, write us.