Three times the EU ‘dropped hands’ with Google

The European Union (EU) has been tough on Google when it fined a total of nearly $ 10 billion with the US technology giant from 2017 to now.

Google faces many legal challenges globally, especially in Europe. The European Commission (EC) fined this giant billions of dollars in three different lawsuits and were appealed by Google. In any case, the world’s largest search company denies misconduct and maintains a view that they make choices that benefit consumers. Since 2010, the EU has launched three different antitrust investigations against Google, involving Google Shopping, Google AdSense and Android, resulting in three fines of nearly tens of billions of dollars. At the same time, Google must adjust its behavior to comply with regulatory requirements. On October 10, 2010, the EC officially investigated Google’s behavior in accordance with Article 9 of Regulation 1/2003 after receiving complaints from ICOMP Organization and a number of other companies. They complain that Google changed its Universal Search algorithm to promote Google Shopping products on the search results page, lowering the ranking of competitors. Therefore, they believe that Google discriminates against, anticompetitive through presentation of search results, depriving users of the ability to choose products and services. On June 27, 2017, Google was found guilty and convicted a fine of EUR 2.4 billion (2.7 billion USD), is the largest penalty for an abuse of monopoly at that time. Google denies the accusations and claims their services have helped the region’s digital economy grow. The penalty is equivalent to 2.5% of Google’s 2016 revenue. Currently, the company in the appeals process wants to mitigate or overturn the penalty. In addition, the EU Competition Commission (EUCC) decided to oversee Google’s PageRank algorithm. Google is responsible for reporting to the EUCC every 4 months. After being penalized, Google split the Google Shopping shopping service into its own company, operating independently. A year later, the EC fined Google again for forcing Android device manufacturers (OEMs) to install Google Search and Android suite of apps. The EC investigates Google based on two lawsuits, one from FairSearch, and one from Aptoide. FairSearch is a consortium founded in 2010, initially consisting of travel-related websites such as Expedia, TripAdvisor, and then a number of big names such as Microsoft, Nokia, Oracle. In April 2013, they filed a lawsuit against the EU, denouncing Google’s behavior with its Android operating system in violation of the EU’s anti-competition law. Meanwhile, Aptoide was filed in June 2014. Aptoide is an Android app market, competing with Google’s Play Store. Aptoide emphasizes Google’s approach making it very difficult for services like them to be installed on users’ devices. In addition, some components that used to belong to the Android Open Source Project have been migrated to the Google service suite, including Gmail, Google Maps and Play Store. So, on April 15, 2015, the EC started an investigation into Google based on the above two lawsuits. Google argues that what it does with Android is no different from what Apple, Microsoft do with iOS and Windows Phone. Device manufacturers can still release an Android phone without the Google suite of apps. On July 19, 2018, the EU declared penalty Google 4.3 billion EUR (5 billion USD). Google appealed in October 2018. According to a company spokesperson, Android makes more options available to users. This is by far the largest penalty imposed by the EU for a company for its anti-competitive behavior. Google has changed the way apps are distributed in the EU, charging OEMs for Play Store access, and in return OEMs no longer have to install Google Search and Google Chrome. In March 2019, Google said European Android users can choose which browser and search engine they want to use on the device. Most recently, March 2019, EU Google penalty 1.49 billion EUR (1.7 billion USD) for preventing competition in the online advertising market. The commission said Google had an exclusive contract with website owners, preventing them from cooperating with Google’s competitors. The investigation involved Google search-mediated search boxes and display ads. These ads are provided by Google AdSense for Search. This is a division of Google that allows websites and apps to monetize search ads. Google’s terms for website owners change over time, from a 2006 monopoly to a “flexible monopoly” a few years later. But EU authorities still believe it hurts competition and allows Google to control how competitors display their search ads, including the size, colors and fonts they use. According to Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, this is a legal offense under EU law. That behavior lasted more than 10 years and deprived other brands of competitiveness, innovation as well as the interests of users. Google stopped using exclusive contract terms in 2016 only after the EC made a formal objection. In June 2019, the company announced an appeal. However, the three above-mentioned penalties do not seem to “disgrace” anything to Google. Shares of Alphabet, the parent company Google, are still growing close to 30% in 2020. Investors seem accustomed to the oversight of countries with Google. Not to mention, the prolonged legal process also makes the authorities tired. The effect that the punishment brings is not clear. For example, despite the change in Google Shopping, less than 1% of service traffic is diverted to other shopping websites. Therefore, the EC is about to overhaul digital regulations, related to the business models of companies like Google. They want Big Tech to be more accountable for content across platforms and ensure that competitors have a chance to compete with the big boys. It is expected to make a big change in business practices, even Big Tech’s business model. Law professor Ioannis Kokkoris from Queen Mary University said this is a move that shows the EU wants to strengthen its leadership position in the enforcement of the technology market. Many other national competition authorities will follow. Meanwhile, Alec Burnside – partner of the law firm Dechert – said that the new EU proposal reflects the increasingly recognized government must have new power to deal with technology giants. For its part, Google or another company may use legal process to highlight the negative impact of regulation on innovation and the overall economy, making the final regulation less stricter than the proposed ban. head. Other than lobbying, however, there is nothing they can do about it to discourage new regulation in the short term. Du Lam (Synthetic)