The US DoJ has published its proposed remedies after Google was found guilty of monopolistic practices. What does it mean for the media and ad tech industries? Mat Broughton takes a look...

Following the US Department of Justice (DoJ) ruling that found that Google maintained illegal monopolies for over a decade, today saw the release of the remedies that the DoJ has recommended. It was leaked earlier this week that the DoJ would seek the divestiture of the Chrome browser, and now we have the full outline of the proposed measures.

The key areas include:

• Divestiture of Chrome and Android
• Data Sharing and Distribution Changes
• Search and Advertising Market Reforms
• Limiting Google’s influence in AI

Read on as Mat Broughton analyses what these remedies could mean for the ad tech industry.

The obvious

Given that much of the case surrounded the exclusivity agreements Google had brokered with the likes of Apple and Samsung, these are heavily targeted by the proposed judgement. Under the terms of the proposed action, Google cannot offer “something of value” to any third-party to disincentivise them from entering the search, or search ads, markets. Nor can it condition access to any of its services, such as its Play Store, on the use of any of its other services. Share your toys Google.

The breakup(s)

The most eye-catching element of the DOJ’s proposals is undoubtedly a forced sale of Google’s Chrome browser. And not just the Chrome browser itself, but all the APIs and software for the open-source Chromium project, which underpins many other browsers including Edge (Microsoft), Samsung Internet Browser, DuckDuckGo, and Opera.

Estimates from Bloomberg project Chrome could be worth up to USD$20bn, given its colossal 3.45 billion userbase. Given how closely Google’s Privacy Sandbox initiative is tied to Chrome, untangling those links is likely to be extremely laborious for Google’s developers, especially when there’s additional ongoing uncertainty about the fate of its ad tech stack…

Obviously the scale of the divestiture limits who’d be able to buy Chrome, moreover a host of likely candidates (Microsoft, Amazon, OpenAI, et al) would face antitrust scrutiny themselves if they opened their wallets. The formation of a non-profit group (eg Mozilla Foundation) or sale to collaborators (eg the current Chromium contributors, minus Google of course) are potential avenues. Or to go way out of left-field, a certain high-flying ad tech company has just launched a TV OS, a web browser would certainly make things omnichannel…

Not just satisfied with putting Chrome on the chopping block, the DOJ’s axe is also hovering over its Android mobile OS. If, five years after the judgement is enacted, there has not been a “substantial” increase in competition, Google would have to also sell Android unless it could prove that its ownership of the OS did not hinder competition. This may be a cynical take, but five years is not a long time in love and big tech wars - would Google’s big tech rivals sit back from properly entering search in order to further wound their opponent? Surely not…

The under-the-radar

While the proposed sale of Chrome has got tongues wagging industry-wide, the hefty proposals from the DOJ include some nuggets which have flown a little more under the radar. Firstly, staying with search, any small finger-in-the-pie deals Google has made with minor search-tied platforms will also have to be sold, and any future investment in third-party search engines is banned. A huge proposal in the world of search engine optimisation (SEO) has also been outlined, as Google could be forced to share real-time search index data from all of its properties, including YouTube.

Next: AI. Though it remains a relatively nascent field, the DOJ has moved to address potential anticompetitive actions by outlining a ban on exclusivity agreements between Google and publishers for AI data scraping. Additionally, publishers would be offered an “easy usable” opt-out against web scraping.

Finally, a big one for the ad tech industry. Under the conditions outlined by the DOJ, Google must provide "access to user-side data on a non-discriminatory basis" and "ads data" pertaining to its search text ads. This potentially blows Privacy Sandbox, and its lucrative search ads business, wide open. Google must also not “undermine, frustrate, interfere with, or in any way lessen the ability[...] an advertiser to discover or shift its Search Text Ad spending to a rival Search Text Ads provider”

It’s a long way to go, there will be years of appeals which will inevitably whittle the DOJ’s proposals down in some form, plus we also have the uncertainty of an incoming Trump presidency to factor in. But make no mistake, the US has thrown down one hell of a marker in how it will police big tech firms going forward.