Last week, an American Federal Court of Virginia recognized Google guilty of having violated antitrust laws in two main digital advertising markets. Judge Leonie Brinkema judged that Google had illegally monopolia the publisher’s advertising markets and announcements of announcements and had illegally linked its advertising server (DoubleClick for publishers, or DFP) to its exchange of ads (ADX).

However, the court did not find Google guilty in the third alleged market – the advertising networks of the advertiser. In addition, it should be noted that Google has expressed its intention to challenge decisions.

The case, carried by the United States Ministry of Justice, between now in the phase of remedies, where emphasis is placed on the determination of the way of restoring competition. MJ lawyers should put pressure on structural remedies, including the potential rupture of Google’s Ad Tech battery. DFP or ADX forced disinvestment – two tires of Google’s domination in programmatic advertising – is now firmly on the table.

The result of the remedies phase could reshape the digital advertising landscape, with important implications for publishers, advertisers and rival advertising technology platforms.

Google’s priorities?

The decision of the Brinkema judge intervened a few days before the parallel battle of the doj with Google for the domination of the research market – a case where Google also supports a verdict of previous guilt – officially entered its remedy phase on April 21 in a hearing room in Washington, DC.

Here, the DoJ offers important measures, in particular by forcing Google to disintegrate its Chrome browser, stop default search engine agreements and share search data with competitors. Google maintains that these remedies are excessive and plans to appeal, with the battle in this arena which takes place more in the coming weeks.

A quick reading of the results of the first quarter of this week of Google Parent Alphabet shows which of these two battles with the DoJ will be a priority. Research income ($ 50.7 billion for the period) increased by almost 10% in annual shift, while Google Network revenues, that is to say its display advertising activity, decreased from 2% in annual shift to $ 7.3 billion.

U-Tour confidentiality sandbox

Meanwhile, Digiday readers will not need to recall that earlier this week, also saw the backing efforts of the Google Chrome team to depreciate third -party cookies – a decision that caused many Rots in the sector. For some, this explains the death of Sandbox of privacy, an effort to continue the precise web advertising in Chrome which took place for more than half a decade.

Officially, Google claims that all of these developments have occurred in isolation and that its confidentiality sandbox efforts are still alive, with meetings at the Tent Industry Conference next week possible.

However, several sources have told Digiday that since the April 22 announcement, Google has played long game, or 3D failure, while the others play ladies.

Anthony Chavez, VP confidentiality sandbox at Google, “there are divergent prospects” on the future of display advertising without third -party cookies. Therefore, Google will not deploy an prompt for such technologies within Chrome.

In theory, this evolution could have interfere with the attempts of the publishers to obtain the consent of the first part of their audience, which is necessary to continue a commercial model funded by advertising without third -party cookies. A look that could scream “anti -competitive” to certain market observers, even if a defendant argues the user’s privilege as attenuation.

Of course, Google is publicly holding its utility justification, that is to say the promotion of publishing financed by advertising, for its U-turn on the authorization of third-party cookies in Chrome, even if there is generalized frustration on the management of the confidentiality sandbox.

Thus, with Google’s web browser in play in a DC audience room – IA rivals such as Openai and Perplexity express an interest in buying the web browser if the Doj forces a sale – a red face rollback on third -party cookies can be the favorite sacrifice if Google wants to save its data on Firehose chromage.

If you feel firmly about one of the questions addressed above, then do not hesitate To get in touch – No public relations land please.