The argument that I see that could be made (which is different from what the judge said here) is that Google used their monopoly in search to gain an unfair adv

The argument that I see that could be made (which is different from what the judge said here) is that Google used their monopoly in search to gain an unfair advantage in Network Ads. I could totally see forcing Google to spin-off their external ad network, but at the same time, these ads sucks and are getting worse CPM wise. There is another ongoing case regarding Google's Ad business (concerning Display Ads and more specifically the ad auctions) which seems pretty strong. But again, it's not about preventing Google from owning the ad platform for their own properties. Preventing companies from owning the advertising platform for their own properties is a pretty terrible idea (got an idea for a new ad format that no network supports? Tough luck!). But, preventing a player with a monopoly in one sector from having an ad platform for other players, that's sensible.