EU Hits Google With Antitrust Fine of $1.69 Billion Over Ad Practices
The European Commission's antitrust regulators issued a third fine against Google Wednesday, this time over its ad practices. Google now faces more than $9 million in EU antitrust fines.
March 20, 2019 at 04:12 PM
4 minute read
Google has been hit with a third antitrust fine from European Union regulators over alleged antitrust violations related to ad sales, as calls to break up big tech grow.
European Commissioner for Competition Margrethe Vestager tweeted Wednesday that the EU fined Google 1.49 billion euros ($1.69 billion) for “illegal practices in search advertising brokering.” She claimed the Mountain View, California-based company misused its dominant position in search ads—holding more than 70 percent of the EU market from 2006 to 2016—by imposing “contractual restrictions on third-party sites.”
The fine stems from Google's “AdSense for Search” program, which brokered ad deals between website publishers offering in-site search functions and advertisers. According to the European Commission, Google contractually prohibited competitors' advertisements from appearing in third-party websites' search results starting in 2006.
“This is illegal under EU antitrust rules,” Vestager said in a press release. “The misconduct lasted over 10 years and denied other companies the possibility to compete on the merits and to innovate—and consumers the benefits of competition.”
The commission said Google began shifting to a “premium placement” model in 2009. It required publishers, such as news sites, to place Google's advertisements in the most profitable part of their website's search results, over competitors. The same year, Google also allegedly included clauses mandating publishers get the company's approval before changing rivals' advertisements, allowing it to “control how attractive, and therefore clicked on, competing search adverts could be.”
Google stopped the practices in July 2016 after the commission issued a statement of objections. But the latest fine, accounting for 1.29 percent of Google's 2018 global turnover, is meant to prevent the company from implementing similar practices.
“We've always agreed that healthy, thriving markets are in everyone's interest. We've already made a wide range of changes to our products to address the Commission's concerns,” said Kent Walker, Google's senior vice president for global affairs and legal department head, in a statement Wednesday. “Over the next few months, we'll be making further updates to give more visibility to rivals in Europe.”
Wednesday's fine is the third in a series of European Commission antitrust penalties against Google. In July, EU regulators fined Google a massive 4.34 billion euros ($5 billion), claiming Google-owned Android phones pushed users toward the company's search engine over competitors. Google was hit with a fine of 2.42 billion euros ($2.72 billion) from the commission in 2017 for promoting its own shopping comparison site over others on its search engine.
Google's EU antitrust fines now total more than $9 billion.
Walker said Google has “been listening carefully to the feedback we're getting” from the commission, in a blog post Tuesday. The company has changed its licensing mode for Google apps since the 2018 fine, making it easier for Android phone users to install competing browsers and search functions, he noted. Since 2017, Google has adapted its shopping feature to better promote competition.
Backlash over Google's size and practices more recently came stateside. Earlier this month, presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, called for a breakup of tech companies, including Google, promising to retroactively split mergers and acquisitions if elected.
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Marsh McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
Aggressive FTC May Force Merging Companies to Bolster Legal Defenses
4 minute readBest Legal Departments: How Blackstone's Legal and Compliance Team Got the All-Clear to Grow Business
CEOs Want Data-Based Risk Management; GCs Lack the Tech to Do So.
Trending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250