The European Union has been investigating antitrust allegations against Google for seven years, and last week it levied a two point seven billion euro fine against the company, finding the Google abuses its power as the world's biggest search engine
to disadvantage smaller shopping search services. Google disagrees with the decision and may appeal but decision, but the decision might set a precedent for additional EU investigations of Google's Android mobile phone software and online advertising service, which are currently ongoing. Here to talk with us about the ruling by the European Union are Spencer Waller, professor at Loyola University Chicago School of Law, and ambling On Slin, a partner in
the Paris office of Simmons and Simmons. I'm bling, can you explain what the EU found here in finding Google this very large amount of money? Well, the new Commission of find that by a leveraging on its very big market share on the search search market, to being able to put forward into favor uh their shopping services, to to provide prominent policeman for their shopping comparison sites and services, so by favoring their own services. To the judgment of
the arrivals. They would have abuse. They have abused their dominant position. Spencer. It's Google search engine. Is it allowed to take advantage of its innovations and give any preference to its own services according to the EU? Well, Um, you get a different answer under the U S and the EU antitrust laws. And in the US, the FTC did not take action on the core allegation of favoring Google zonn Um shopping services versus its rivals, and it
took minor action on other issues. The EU squarely addressed the favoritism issue. It was the core part of this decision and in addition to the large whopping fine that Michael talked about, um, the order is probably the most complex part is going to require Google to stop its egal practices and respect what the EU called simple principle of equal treatment. And it's consistent with the EU law,
but it's not that simple. I'm blame. What might Google do here in order to comply going forward with the with the e use ruling, because the penalties could be it could be ongoing if if Google doesn't comply with the ruling. Yeah, exactly, And that's the tricky part of the of the ruling because the injunction given to two Google seems simple and and pretty straightforward, but it might be very complex for for Google to comply with the
decision of the of the Commission. Actually, the commission or considers that Google knows its products and services better than the Commission and that they should have room for maneuver to implement the measures to be taken to to ensure equal treatments. But this seems to be a poison gift to Google because it seems a bit strange that the Mission has not formed the view during these seven years
of investigation. But what would be an appropriate remedy? Google had already proposed many times commitments three times UH commitments which were market tested and rejected in the end, but that was the first step in and trying to to
build an appropriate commitments. We can remember that in two thousands Sucheen, Google offered to display links to three rivals spatialized such services close to its own services in the place which is clearly visible to users, and these team is pretty much close from what Google might have to propose now Spencer. Even if Google appeals, it will still under European laws have to change its business practices within ninety days. So what exactly doesn't do now or or
not even exactly just broadly, what is it do now? Well, you know, I'm not a hundred percent sure they have the right of appeal and is going to take some time. There's two levels of appeal that that that can occur in the EU system. What they have to do is satisfy the Commission that they're not preferring their own shopping
services over the rivals. And the commitments that we're rejected in the past had to do with labeling the Google products more clearly, and that was not sufficient for the commission. And what they hint and we haven't seen the full decision. We've just seen kind of the press release in some Q and A s um what what the decision hints at is that the results have to be equal in the sense that rival shopping services be displayed on the first page or in a similar place. If Google somehow
demotes its own shopping services. So it's possible in the short term, while they're appealing or otherwise trying to work this out, it's possible they will simply uh stop doing uh their their shopping services on the front page or at all in the EU markets. It doesn't. The injunction doesn't affect anywhere outside the I think for eleven or thirteen countries in the EU where these services have been possible.
So either they have to upgrade the way they display certain rival services, or they have to downgrade the way they display their own comparison shopping. I'm blind. This case is hardly the end of Google's issues with the European Union. There are a couple of other big investigations that the EU has going on in regard to alleged anti competitive activity. Um, how will this decision affect those investigations going forward? Well, there are two other pending cases, one on the Android
occurring operating system and one on the absence program. Uh. This seems to be to me to be two different cases. The practices which are at stake are very different and more classic. Actually, Uh, there is more to the Microsoft case and although classic, abuse of them in a position
with exclusivities imposed on partners or on customers. UM. So I'm not sure that the Commission can really leverage on the Shopping decision to to copy paste this decision to the two other pending cases, nor that the Commission could also do the same by opening new proceedings on other vertical services that Google is operating concerning travels, restaurants, maps,
et cetera. It would be new cases, but the signal that the Commission is sending is very strong that they are not prepared um to to let Google um let their services like that. So either they commit and change their practices or there will be investigations and potentially if he find an intern, change to change to change. Well.
Our thanks to Humbly Nonsland, a partner in the Paris office of Simmons and Simmons, and Spencer Waller, Professor at Loyola University Chicago School of Love, for being here today