EU warms to Google antitrust concessions

BRUSSELS Tue Jul 24, 2012 7:27pm EDT

Attendees sits in front of a Google logo during Google I/O Conference at Moscone Center in San Francisco, California June 28, 2012. REUTERS/Stephen Lam

Attendees sits in front of a Google logo during Google I/O Conference at Moscone Center in San Francisco, California June 28, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Stephen Lam

Related Topics

BRUSSELS (Reuters) - Google took a significant step toward resolving its antitrust problems in the EU after regulators warmed to new concessions offered to settle an investigation into alleged anti-competitive behaviour and avert a possible fine.

The European Commission said on Tuesday that there was a "level of good understanding" with the world's most popular search engine regarding its latest proposals that would form the basis of discussions before the Commission makes a final decision whether to accept them.

The comments from the Commission came after Google - to comply with the EU watchdog's demand - revised initial proposals to cover computers, tablets and mobile devices, a source said.

The Commission did not say what Google had proposed but did say that the concessions formed the basis of further technical discussions.

If the company does eventually convince the EU regulator of the merits of its offer, it would avoid the kind of lengthy battle that plagued its rival Microsoft in the last decade and ended in more than a billion euros in fines.

"I can confirm we have reached a good level of understanding with Google based on its proposals," EU competition policy spokesman Antoine Colombani said on Tuesday.

"There will soon be discussions at technical level. We hope this process will lead to remedies addressing our concerns," he said.

A Google spokeswoman said: "We continue to work cooperatively with the European Commission."


The source said Google's latest proposals covered the four areas of concerns cited by EU Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia in May but were not very detailed.

"The technical meetings will put flesh on the bones," the source said.

The source said the revised concessions focused on the presentation of search results, how reviews appear in the search results and adjustment or removal of some contractual restrictions.

The EU watchdog has said Google may unfairly favour other Google services over rivals and may have copied material from other websites, such as travel and restaurant reviews, without permission.

It is also concerned that Google's advertising deals may exclude third parties from concluding similar deals with rivals while contractual restrictions on software developers may prevent advertisers from transferring their online campaigns to rival search engines.

The FairSearch coalition, whose members include online travel agencies and Google complainants Expedia and TripAdvisor, said monitoring was crucial to ensure that Google lives up to its word.

"Any binding set of changes to Google's practices must be paired with strong ongoing monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that the company does not return to its anti-competitive practices," the group said in a statement.

Companies can be fined up to 10 percent of their turnover for breaching EU rules. In Google's case, that could reach $4 billion based on its 2011 results.

Almunia is holding a news conference on a number of cases on Wednesday. The source told Reuters Almunia was likely to make an announcement about Google then.

Google has been under the EU regulatory spotlight in the last 18 months following complaints from more than a dozen rivals including Microsoft.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission is also investigating Google on similar claims.

(Additional reporting by Philip Blenkinsop in Brussels, Diane Bartz in Washington; Editing by Jane Merriman and Steve Orlofsky)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (2)
Geek_News wrote:
This is what I don’t understand about some of these regulations. Google created a better product than everyone else and sought to use their own product to market the rest of their products/services. Yet now they are somehow being punished because the public decided they liked Google more than everyone else.

Apple creates a better product, people flock to Apple, Apple uses their own devices, software ect like Google has and there is no anti-trust regulation, very little talk about it.

What gives? Apple favors their own software, services ect in iTunes and the App store. If they didn’t it would just be bad business since. Yet regulators seem fine with that?

I understand fostering competition and not allowing a single company a dominate position or to squeeze out the competition. But what Google is going hardly seems any different than any other business model out there. Stores gives preferred placement to their brand. Where is what Google did any different than that?

Jul 24, 2012 4:14pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
usagadfly wrote:
An explanation of Google difficulties:

Google has been changing. It presents the appearance of not having changed. The issue is how google presents the results of searches done with its search engine. It established its reputation as an encyclopedic source of what is available on the web, presented by relevance. That is what people think of when they think google.

But, like many formerly good companies, google has changed the game and now seems to present results from advertisers first, rather than results selected in the formerly money neutral fashion. In other words. accountants have made it much, much more like yahoo and msn, which have always presented advertisements primarily.

None of this has to do with making a technically superior product, and in fact is detrimental to it. The EU wants to reduce bait and switch tactics with internet products. Part of the reason is that they see the internet as a public utility rather than a profit driven free-for-all as the USA does. Here, concentration and reduction of competition is viewed as something positive, primarily for financial reasons. Increasingly everything in the USA is being privatized including the internet, roads, water utilities, health care, airports and airlines. The costs however remain largely met from governmental (i.e. tax) resources. Europe is different.

Jul 24, 2012 6:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.