Executives across the advertising and search industries on Tuesday are trying to sort through a federal verdict handed down Monday that will determine how their industry will change, and what next steps Google -- along with publishers and platform partners -- will take.

A federal judge on Monday ruled that Google violated an antitrust law by “serving as the default search engine on browsers operated by Apple and Mozilla, as well as on Android devices.”

The Alphabet company, founded in 1998, became the backbone to the industry supporting search and search text ads. While distribution deals have been under the microscope most recently, the next antitrust trial between the Department of Justice and Google will begin in Virginia on September 9. The case will focus on whether Google has illegally monopolized digital advertising technology.

Advertisers are likely to experience disruptions due to the antitrust decision, and should expect antitrust issues in the digital media industry to surge, according to Andrew Frank, distinguished VP analyst at Gartner Marketing Practice.

“We've already seen signs of competition heating up the search business. This will embolden challengers to Google's dominance in that area,” Frank said. “Organizations may experience even more disruption in digital advertising performance as the flow of data about user interests and behaviors becomes more fragmented and scrutinized.”

Udayan Bose, NetElixir founder and CEO, believes this is the beginning of change, adding that Google’s Apple distribution deal is worth about $36 billion annually and that Microsoft will benefit from the ruling.

Bose pointed to the 1999 antitrust ruling against Microsoft. The findings sided almost entirely with the U.S. government, ruling that Microsoft had violated multiple sections of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

“It caused Microsoft's valuation to drop from $600 billion pre-court ruling to $270 billion post court-ruling at the end of 1999, beginning of 2000,” Bose said. “It also caused Bill Gates to step back as CEO and appoint Steve Balmer, who formally became CEO in 2000.”

Bose also pointed to the impact this could have on employees. “If the September 9 trial does not go in Google’s favor, a lot of similarities could be drawn between Microsoft’s and Google’s trial,” Bose said.

Microsoft could emerge this time as the winner, Bose said, and distribution agreements will likely receive more international scrutiny, requiring Google to invest more to protect its position.

“It will likely take about six months to understand the outcome, but I do not think Google will exist in the same form,” Bose said. “Google will never be the same again.”

Madi Bachar, vice president of global sales at MGID, agreed that it will take time to understand the impact.

“Search advertising is the most effective way of advertising at scale compared to any other format," Bachar said, adding that today Google’s dominance gives publishers one focus for SEO. "If this changes, so too will publishers' SEO tactics and strategies for becoming more visible to users."

Publishers will need to adapt as new opportunities surface, but those that have survived in the market are no strangers to change, Bachar said.

Lance Wolder, head of strategy and marketing at PadSquad, thinks it presents an opportunity for privacy-first engines like DuckDuckGo and Brave to gain traction, potentially becoming the default options on devices or platforms.

“It raises intriguing questions about the balance between personalized experiences and data privacy," Wolder said.

He said that as AI-powered search technologies emerge, such as SearchGPT, this ruling could lead to new solutions that pair speed, ease of use, and privacy protections that ultimately put Google on its heels.

“While the court's ruling will likely increase consumer options, old habits die hard, making it difficult to envision a future where users do not default to Google, regardless of whether it remains the default search engine on their devices,” said Rachel Bucey Klein, vice president of earned and owned media at Wpromote.

The most compelling remedy would be for the courts to mandate Google share proprietary data with its competitors, allowing rivals to enhance their algorithms and compete on a more equal playing field, Klein added.

If the September trial does not go in Google's favor, the company likely “will be required to provide pricing transparency,” said Kevin Lee, serial entrepreneur and chairman at Didit.

This is the opposite of what happened when Google released its Performance Max campaign platform.