For the second time in under a year, a U.S. federal judge has ruled that Google crossed the line of antitrust law, this time for the way it runs its digital advertising empire. But while the ruling marks a clear legal blow, Google managed to sidestep harsher consequences—at least for now.

In a 115-page decision, Judge Leonie Brinkema concluded that Google illegally maintained monopolies in two critical segments of the ad tech world: the open-web display publisher ad server market and the open-web ad exchange market. She also ruled that Google unlawfully tied its ad exchange (AdX) to its publisher ad server (DFP), a move that effectively locked out rivals. However, she dismissed the Justice Department’s claim that Google held a monopoly over the tools advertisers use to buy ad space.

Google immediately framed the ruling as a partial win. “We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half,” said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s VP of regulatory affairs. That optimism stems in part from the court’s rejection of challenges to Google’s major acquisitions, like DoubleClick and AdMeld, which formed the backbone of its ad dominance. Without those pieces on the table, regulators now face an uphill battle in seeking any structural remedies.

Nevertheless, the decision indicates increased judicial receptivity to examining platform supremacy. A few legal observers maintain that the court’s construction of the Sherman Act might shift precedent. While that is considered, Google sets up for another hearing regarding potential solutions to its search monopoly lawsuit—where calls for unbundling Chrome are imminent.

Within an online landscape in which gatekeepers control entry and revenue, these decisions have the potential to cascade far beyond Mountain View.