Google took this as a partial win, with the company’s VP for regulatory affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, stating: “We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half. The Court found that our advertiser tools and our 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.”
Geller called the ruling a “major inflection point” for digital advertising, as it confirms that Google’s dominance wasn’t just about market share: It was reinforced by unlawful practices like tying DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP) with Google Ad Exchange.
“Structural separation is no longer theoretical, it’s moving forward,” she said. “For advertisers and publishers, the implications are real.”
This story originally appeared on Computerworld
