After years of growing concern, court battles, and mounting evidence, the U.S. District Court has made it official: Google unlawfully monopolized the open web ad tech market.
In her landmark ruling, Judge Leonie Brinkema found Google guilty of willfully acquiring and maintaining monopoly power in two key digital advertising markets: publisher ad servers and ad exchanges. She also ruled that Google illegally tied its ad server (DFP) to its exchange (AdX), suppressing competition and hurting publishers, rivals, and the open internet itself.
At C Wire, we’re not surprised by the outcome. But we are deeply encouraged.
A Pattern Finally Acknowledged
For over a decade, publishers and independent ad tech companies have lived under Google’s shadow — not because of innovation, but because of integration-by-force, opaque auction dynamics, and systemic self-preferencing.
From Project Bernanke to Unified Pricing Rules, the playbook was clear: entrench dominance, marginalize rivals, and dictate the terms of the open web under the guise of “efficiency.” I can remember my times on the publisher side where it was clear that many product developments where not supportive of the strategies we wanted to put in place but helping Google. Stepping away from Google was also impossible.
The DOJ didn’t just tell this story — it backed it up with internal documents, publisher testimonies, and economic data that painted a vivid picture of what the industry already suspected: Google wasn’t winning the ad tech market — it was rigging it.
Why it matters for the Open Web
Let’s be clear: this ruling is more than a win for regulators. It’s a revenge for publishers who watched their revenue potential shrink as they were forced into closed ecosystems. It’s a warning to advertisers who unknowingly participated in auctions tilted to favor one dominant player. And it’s a signal to the broader industry: the status quo is not sustainable.
Judge Brinkema’s language was direct: Google’s behavior harmed competition, disadvantaged publishers, and deprived users of a fair and open web.
This moment should spark not just remedies, but rethinking.
What comes next — and why it’s a pivotal moment
It's hard to establish exactly what will come next. It may include divestitures of ad tech assets and restrictions on Google’s ability to self-preference. But no court order alone will restore fairness.
It’s up to the industry — publishers, advertisers, agencies, and technology partners — to build a healthier, more transparent ecosystem. That's the direction we would humbly like to take at C Wire.
C Wire’s commitment to a fairer future
C Wire was built from the ground up on independence, transparency, and trust. We never relied on cookies or cross-site identifiers. Our SSP doesn’t favor specific buyers or manipulate auctions. We empower publishers to monetize fairly and advertisers to reach real audiences across all browsers, including the ID-less ones most platforms still ignore.
Here’s how we’re different:
- No self-preferencing. Our AI-powered SSP operates with auditable fairness — we never advantage specific deals, campaigns or buyers behind the scenes.
- No bundling. Publishers and buyers can plug in flexibly — our tools are modular, not tied in forced packages.
- No black boxes. Advertisers see where ads run. Publishers see how value is created. We believe in radical transparency, not hidden margins.
- Full cookieless reach. Our targeting doesn’t rely on identity. That’s not just privacy-first — it’s future-proof. We believe there are many new ways to make ads relevant without tracking users.
This court decision doesn’t just punish past behavior. It opens the door to new standards — and a new era of digital advertising built on trust, performance, and open competition.
The open web deserves better. Let’s re-build it.
