CAMP statement on U.S. Google ad tech remedies decision

September 17, 2026 [Ottawa, ON] – A U.S. federal court has rejected the Department of Justice’s request to break up parts of Google’s online advertising business after finding that the company illegally acquired and maintained monopoly power in the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets. Instead, the court will rely on behavioural remedies that require Google to make its products work more easily with rivals, share more data with publishers and follow new rules against discriminatory conduct. 

 The decision leaves Google in control of both DFP, the publisher ad server at the centre of the case, and AdX, its ad exchange. The court had previously found that Google unlawfully tied the two products together and used that integration to shut out competitors and protect its monopoly. 

“This is a missed opportunity to change the structure that allowed Google to build and protect its monopoly in the first place,” said Keldon Bester, Executive Director of the Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project. “The court found that Google used the connections between its products to shut out competitors and strengthen its position. The remedy now asks Google to keep that structure and follow a new set of rules inside it.” 

The court found that DFP served 91 per cent of worldwide open-web display impressions in the publisher ad server market in 2022. AdX handled up to 71 per cent of transactions among the exchanges that produced data in the case, and Google maintained a 20 per cent AdX take rate for more than a decade even as rival exchanges often charged less. The court also found that publishers had little choice but to continue using AdX.  

The Competition Bureau is pursuing its own case against Google in Canada. It alleges that Google abused its dominant position across the online advertising technology supply chain and is asking the Competition Tribunal to order Google to sell DFP and AdX, along with other measures aimed at the conduct the Bureau says harmed competition. 

“Canada should learn from the U.S. decision, not copy it,” Bester said. “Interoperability, data access and rules against self-preferencing can help, but the Bureau should keep making the case for structural change. If one company still controls the tools publishers use to sell ads and the marketplace where those ads are sold, the underlying conflict remains.” 

Europe is the next major jurisdiction expected to decide how to address Google’s conduct in online advertising. Whatever remedy emerges there, Canada should make its own assessment of what is needed to restore competition in the Canadian market. The Competition Bureau and Competition Tribunal should focus on whether the final remedy reduces Google’s ability to favour its own products, lowers barriers for competitors and gives Canadian publishers and advertisers meaningful alternatives.