‘Are my selfish desires more worthy than Google's selfish desires?’: Experts on Google vs DOJ antitrust trial

Google and the US Department of Justice (DOJ) have officially concluded a two-week remedies trial over the tech giant’s illegal online advertising monopoly.

The court will now deliberate if Google must open-source parts of its adtech systems or face other structural remedies. Closing arguments are scheduled for November 2025 and a ruling is expected in early 2026. 

The DOJ is seeking structural remedies and pushing for a divestiture of Google Ad Manager while Google argues that breaking up integrated tools could have wider consequences and instead proposed to build on Ad Manager’s interoperability and allow publishers to use third-party tools to access Google’s advertiser bids in real-time. 

A breakup of Google could potentially reshape the entire digital advertising landscape and have major implications on future big tech regulations. Industry experts spoke to PMW about exactly what should be done.

‘The market now needs neutral pipes; a strong ruling by the judge in this case could go at least some way to making that happen’

James Taylor, CEO and Founder, Particular Audience, said:

“It’s never easy trying to predict the outcome of an ongoing trial, but the fact that the Department of Justice has formally asked US District Judge Leonie Brinkema to order Google to divest its ad exchange, AdX, suggests that Google might not get off as lightly as it did a few weeks ago. In that ruling, the judge shied away from requiring Google to offload its Chrome browser and Android operating system.

“This time round, there may be a different outcome. There’s an inherent conflict of interest in the fact that auctions run by Google’s publisher ad server have favoured and can favour its own exchange and buy-side. Building the ecosystem in the first place required Google to make it work, the complexity of which is not lost on me. The market now needs neutral pipes; a strong ruling by the judge in this case to require Google to dispose of AdX could go at least some way to making that happen because it is not something Google is likely to do of its own volition.”

‘I really wouldn't be surprised if Google already has five or six products ready to replace any they may lose’

David Nelson, Co-founder and CEO, Limelight Inc., said: 

“It’s really quite incredible that Google, the company that wrestled search dominance from Yahoo by not including ads, is now in this position. Really, it is a hero-to-zero transition. But I think that part of our human condition is sometimes to drag down greatness.

“I personally believe that Google has had huge success in the ad business by being good at developing products fast. Yes, it’s become clear that because of the success of those products and their strict controls around how they integrate with the wider infrastructure, they have developed a very large market dominance. It’s also clear that they made decisions which benefited Google while disenfranchising other companies. But at that same time, it makes for a great "how to grow your business" roadmap.

“I do find it a little odd that we critique a company for building great products, taking them to market well and growing a really successful business. After all, the complaints from industry by and large are coming from large businesses that have their very own similar policies. Is it not fair then, because they are not as big as Google? On the other hand, I'm as keen now as everyone else to jump on the bash Google bus!

“Yes, it would be much better for the rest of us if the world of ADX and GAM were more accessible. But are my selfish desires more worthy than Google's selfish desires? I think probably not.

“I guess we will all naturally land on one side of that argument or the other. Google has, without question, been found to hold a monopoly and so some change is required. But it’s amusing that Google gets to negotiate that change itself. I don't think we should ignore their ability to squeeze out of this relatively unscathed.

“What is perhaps more interesting is the time this all takes. The antitrust world moves at a snail’s pace compared to product development. I really wouldn't be surprised if Google already has five or six products ready to replace any they may lose. Perhaps this tech superiority is where Google holds the most power.”

‘Google will continue to be a critical partner in enabling growth… yet progress will depend on balance’

Kevin Geffray, VP, Paid Media, Regional – UK and Northern Europe, Jellyfish, said: 

“The scrutiny of Google’s ad tech stack should serve as a wake-up call for the industry. Consolidation has created efficiency, but it has also narrowed the pathways for competition. In terms of our wider industry, Google will continue to be a critical partner in enabling growth and transformation for advertisers worldwide – yet progress will depend on balance.

“At Jellyfish, our mission is to champion the freedom of the internet, ensuring that brands, publishers, and consumers have genuine choice. Together with partners such as Google, promoting transparency, interoperability, and accountability upholds a digital ecosystem that protects innovation and ensures fairness.” 

‘It seems like every time Google is faced with regulatory action, the action taken is never enough to really eat into their dominance’

David Murphy, Senior Press Writer, The Digital Voice, said: 

“Quite honestly, I have no idea which way this will go, but I hope the Judge comes to a decision that will give advertisers greater visibility into where their budgets are being spent, and publishers more control over the type of ads appearing on their websites. It seems like every time Google is faced with regulatory action, the action taken is never enough to really eat into their dominance and monopolistic behaviour.

“But if feels at least as if the regulators are putting Google under closer scrutiny – this latest trial comes only a few weeks after Google was forced to share data with its rivals by the DoJ and was fined €2.9 billion by the European Commission, and given just 60 days to explain how they will change their practices to stop abusing their dominant position in online advertising.

“Yes, Google will defend its corner and appeal whatever decision is reached, but in all of these Big Tech trials, it is incumbent on the regulators to retain their focus, listen to the arguments advanced by both sides, and come to a fair decision that benefits the whole industry, not just those with the biggest pockets and the best Lawyers.”

Also published in: Performance Marketing World