In a significant legal blow, Google has once again faced a major loss in a monopoly case, further complicating its ongoing legal battles surrounding antitrust issues. This comes as the tech giant prepares for another trial later this month that could have serious implications for its operations. Adding to its troubles, the company recently received a cease-and-desist order from the Japan Fair Trade Commission, following a hefty antitrust fine upheld in 2024 by the European Union. These developments highlight the growing scrutiny that Google faces from regulators worldwide.

On Thursday, a federal judge ruled that Google has violated antitrust laws and engaged in illegal monopolistic practices within the online advertising technology sector. In 2023, Google generated an astounding $237.9 billion from advertising revenue, dwarfing competitors such as Microsoft and Baidu. This legal action was spearheaded by the Justice Department in collaboration with a coalition of states, emphasizing the seriousness of the case against the search engine giant.

The ruling clearly states, “Plaintiffs have proven that Google has willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive actions to acquire and maintain monopoly power in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets for open-web display advertising.” This statement underscores the court’s findings regarding Google’s practices and the potential harm they pose to fair competition in the digital advertising landscape.

Following the decision by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, it seems inevitable that the U.S. Department of Justice will push for significant changes within the Alphabet-owned company. This could include a forced sale of Google Ad Manager, which encompasses its publisher ad server and ad exchange. The DOJ had previously indicated this as a potential course of action prior to the ruling, suggesting a clear intent to dismantle aspects of Google’s advertising dominance.

“We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half,” stated Google Vice President of Regulatory Affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, in a statement provided to Mashable. “The Court found that our advertiser tools and acquisitions, such as DoubleClick, don’t harm competition. We disagree with the Court’s decision regarding our publisher tools. Publishers have many options and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable, and effective.” This statement reflects Google’s position and its commitment to defending its practices in the face of legal challenges.

Throughout the three-week trial, the DOJ asserted that Google has monopolized the advertising industry by acquiring its competitors and effectively locking publishers and advertisers into utilizing its products. In contrast, Google maintained that it offers a more cost-effective solution to its clients compared to its pricier rivals, emphasizing its competitive edge in the market.

“Google’s monopolistic practices allow it to accumulate excessive profits, which subsequently reduces the financial resources available for workers and businesses that rely on online advertising,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James in a statement. “This has negatively impacted everyone from large news organizations to small independent bloggers, making it increasingly challenging for them to provide free, high-quality online content accessible to all.” This statement captures the widespread repercussions of Google’s actions on the broader digital content ecosystem.

Attorney General James was part of a coalition consisting of attorneys general from 17 states, who collaborated with the DOJ in this substantial antitrust lawsuit against Google. Her commitment to this cause underscores the unified effort to tackle perceived injustices within the tech industry.

“Today we won a significant victory after a court found Google violated the law by leveraging its power and influence to suppress competition,” Attorney General James continued. “I am eager to continue pursuing this case to effectuate tangible changes and restore competition to the online advertising platforms that countless workers and businesses across the nation depend on.” Her remarks highlight the importance of legal accountability in fostering a fair market.

Google’s online advertising technology, which serves as a crucial link between publishers and advertisers, constitutes approximately 12 percent of Alphabet’s overall business. The potential divestiture of Google Ad Manager should not drastically impact the company, as the majority of its revenue is generated from ads displayed on its own platforms like Google Search and YouTube. Notably, Google had previously explored the possibility of selling parts of its ad tech division in response to EU antitrust regulations, as reported by Reuters last year.

This development marks the second instance in which Google has faced a significant defeat in an antitrust case within a span of less than a year.

In August 2024, a U.S. judge determined that Google violated antitrust regulations due to its agreement with Apple, wherein the search giant paid the iPhone manufacturer $20 billion annually to ensure that Google Search remained the default search engine on iOS devices. This ruling demonstrates the increasing regulatory scrutiny surrounding tech giants and their business practices.

Later this month, another trial is set to take place to ascertain the implications of the previous antitrust ruling against Google. The DOJ has also suggested that Google may need to divest itself of its web browser, Google Chrome. Furthermore, should this not adequately address Google’s monopolistic practices, it could be required to sell its mobile operating system, Android.

UPDATE: Apr. 17, 2025, 4:28 p.m. EDT This piece has been updated to include statements from Google and New York Attorney General Letitia James.