Google denies Europe's antitrust accusations

Google has rejected the European Commission's charges that the company harmed consumers and producers by distorting Internet search results to favor its own shopping service. 

|
Virginia Mayo/AP Photo/File
European Union's competition chief Margrethe Vestager speaks during a media conference regarding Google at EU headquarters in Brussels on Wednesday, April 15, 2015. The European Union's executive hit Google with an official antitrust complaint on Wednesday that alleges the company abuses its dominance in Internet searches and also opened a probe into its Android mobile system.

Google Inc has rejected EU antitrust charges that it abused its market power, exposing the company to the risk of a hefty fine if it does not alter its business practices.

The company's comments came after the European Commission in April accused it of distorting internet search results to favor its shopping service, harming both rivals and consumers.

"Economic data spanning more than a decade, an array of documents and statements from complainants all confirm that product search is robustly competitive," Kent Walker, Google's general counsel, wrote in a blog on Thursday.

"We believe that the statement of objection's preliminary conclusions are wrong as a matter of fact, law, and economics."

The comments coincide with the company's 150-page submission countering the Commission's charges.

Commission spokesman Ricardo Cardoso confirmed the receipt of Google's response to the charge sheet. "We will carefully consider Google's response before taking any decision on how to proceed and do not want to prejudge the final outcome of the investigation," he said.

If found guilty, the company could face a fine set at a level sufficient to ensure deterrence, according to the Commission's charge sheet seen by Reuters. The EU antitrust authority can sanction wrongdoers up to 10 percent of their global turnover.

In his blog, Walker said the EU authority had failed to take into account strong competition from online retailers Amazon.com Inc and eBay Inc.

He also said internet traffic had risen by 227 percent in the last decade in the countries where the Commission said it had abused its power to the detriment of rivals.

Same arguments

Walker said the regulator's demand that Google give equal treatment to its rivals was "peculiar and problematic" and only justifiable if the company provided an essential service like an electricity company.

Google's foes were scathing of the company's arguments.

"We have seen this movie before. Defendants in big European antitrust cases have made the same arguments," said Thomas Vinje, a lawyer at lobby group FairSearch, whose members include Microsoft Corp, Nokia Oyj and TripAdvisor Inc.

"And they argued, again like Google today, that the antitrust authorities just don't get it, and that the remedy they demand cannot be implemented without causing technical and market chaos."

Google has however been backed by one study by the Centre for European Reform, a pro-EU think tank. It surveyed prices of 63 items in Britain's consumer inflation basket, comparing prices on Google Shopping with those of the first-placed retailer in normal search results.

Google Shopping was 2.9 percent cheaper.

"Those who lose most from Google's behavior are producers, not consumers, at least in the UK," author John Springford said in a report published last month.

"If Google's prioritization of its own shopping service gave it monopoly power, one would expect prices to be higher in its own service." 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Google denies Europe's antitrust accusations
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Technology/2015/0827/Google-denies-Europe-s-antitrust-accusations
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe