Thursday’s federal court ruling declaring Google a monopoly in the online advertising technology market has made headlines, but for many, it came as no surprise. The verdict merely confirms what has been evident for years. When Google acquired DoubleClick for $3.1 billion back in 2007, it marked the beginning of a deliberate strategy to vertically integrate and dominate the entire online advertising ecosystem. I have written about this numerous times, and the court decision this week doesn’t reveal anything new; it simply makes official what has long been obvious. The monopoly was there for anyone who cared to look. Judge Leonie Brinkema’s ruling leaves little room for ambiguity: Google illegally monopolized both the publisher ad server and ad exchange markets by tying them together in a way that stifled competition, clearly violating Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act. How did Google achieve this? By acquiring key infrastructure such as DoubleClick, Invite Media, and AdMeld, and then ensuring that these assets were used exclusively with Google’s own tools. By 2015, Google had consolidated to a staggering 90% market share in publisher ad servers. This dominance wasn’t solely a result of superior technology, though Google certainly possessed that. The company’s strategic acquisitions and subsequent consolidation of these assets played a crucial role. By integrating and locking down these technologies, Google created a near-impenetrable barrier for competitors, effectively shutting them out of the market. This allowed Google to control the flow of advertising dollars and data, giving it a significant advantage over other players. The implications of this ruling are significant. It underscores the need for stricter antitrust scrutiny and vigilance in the tech industry, where a few companies wield immense power. The case against Google highlights how aggressive acquisitions and strategic integration can be used to monopolize markets, a practice that may be prevalent in other tech sectors as well. Regulators now have a clearer mandate to challenge such practices and protect fair competition. For consumers and smaller businesses, this ruling could bring positive changes. It may lead to more innovation and better services, as other companies are given a fairer chance to compete. It could also result in greater transparency and a more equitable distribution of advertising revenue across the internet. However, the road to rectifying the effects of Google’s monopoly is likely to be long and challenging. The company’s extensive reach and deep integration into the digital advertising ecosystem will make it difficult to dismantle its dominance. In the coming months and years, the focus will be on how regulators and tech companies respond to this ruling. Google has already indicated that it will appeal the decision, and the outcome of this process will be closely watched. Meanwhile, other tech giants are likely to scrutinize their own practices to avoid similar legal challenges. This court decision serves as a landmark in the ongoing battle to ensure a competitive and fair digital marketplace. It is a reminder that the power of large tech companies must be carefully monitored to prevent monopolistic behaviors that stifle innovation and harm competition. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, it is crucial that regulators remain vigilant and proactive in addressing these issues.