BRUSSELS: Google lost an appeal on Wednesday against a 2.4-billion-euro ($2.8-billion) fine imposed by the European Union for abusing its search engine dominance — a big win for the bloc’s anti-trust tussle with the tech titan.
The ruling by the Luxembourg-based General Court confirmed the landmark decision taken by the European Commission in 2017.
The matter could be challenged again, however, if Google decides to turn to the EU’s highest court, the European Court of Justice, for a final say.
“Today’s judgment delivers the clear message that Google’s conduct was unlawful and it provides the necessary legal clarity for the market,” the European Commission said in a statement.
The case centers on Google’s shopping service and is one of three against the search engine giant currently moving through the EU’s drawn-out appeals system.
At the time, the fine was the EU’s biggest ever. But it was later exceeded by a 4.3-billion-euro fine against Google over its Android smartphone operating system.
In its appeal, Google and its parent company Alphabet had argued the EU was “wrong on the law, the facts, and the economics” in the search engine case.
But the court said it dismissed “for the most part the action brought by the two companies, and upholds the fine imposed by the Commission.”
It said that, by favoring its own Google Shopping service over rivals in its search result rankings and positioning, “Google departed from competition on the merits.”
It rejected Google’s argument that big online retailers had their own Internet sites, saying that “those platforms are not on the same market” in which users go comparison shopping.
A Google spokesperson said the company will examine the ruling.
“This judgment relates to a very specific set of facts and while we will review it closely, we made changes back in 2017 to comply with the European Commission’s decision,” the spokesperson said.
“Our approach has worked successfully for more than three years, generating billions of clicks for more than 700 comparison shopping services.”
While Google was dealt a setback in the EU, the company fended off a separate legal case in Britain on Wednesday as the Supreme Court blocked a $4 billion class-action lawsuit accusing it of illegally tracking millions of iPhone users.
The Luxembourg ruling is a win for the EU’s anti-trust supremo Margrethe Vestager, who burst onto the scene in Brussels by scrapping her predecessor’s more conciliatory approach to the US Internet giant.
Vestager had lost in the same court in a different major case, against Apple and Ireland, in which her teams had ordered the iPhone maker to repay 13 billion euros plus interest to the Irish taxpayer. The EU has appealed that ruling.
The fine for Google came after seven years of investigation launched by complaints from other price-comparison services that saw traffic plummet against Google Shopping.
Experts believe that, if it is not overturned on later appeal, Google’s similar forays into vacation rentals and job ads could be next in the EU commission’s firing line.
Along with paying the fine, Google was told to remedy the problem identified by the EU case, even as the appeal moved forward.
The company tweaked its search display to give more prominence to rival shopping aggregators, as well as tourist and travel advice sites such as Tripadviser and Yelp.
But many rivals are deeply dissatisfied with Google’s fixes, believing they do nothing to guarantee fair competition in search results.
“What really matters... is stopping Google from repeating its behavior in the future and protecting European consumers,” said Richard Stables, from price-comparison site Kelkoo.
The European Consumer Organization (BEUC) said Google’s “misleading and unfair practices harmed millions of European consumers by ensuring that rival comparison shopping services were virtually invisible.”
“In light of the ruling, we ask the European Commission to ensure that Google does not abuse its dominance as a search engine by giving its own services preference in other areas,” said BEUC director general Monique Goyens.
The commission, the EU’s anti-trust enforcer, is preparing legislation expected for next year that would impose tough rules on Big Tech.
One of the laws, the Digital Markets Act, sets a clear list of Do’s and Don’ts for Internet “gatekeepers” that includes drastic limits on how Google, or other giants, can squeeze out rivals on their platforms.
Google loses appeal against EU’s 2.4-billion-euro anti-trust fine
https://arab.news/2s8yh
Google loses appeal against EU’s 2.4-billion-euro anti-trust fine
- The case centers on Google’s shopping service and is one of three against the search engine giant currently moving through the EU’s drawn-out appeals system
Israeli journalists warn of media crackdown as UK billionaire prepares Channel 13 sale
- The Union of Journalists in Israel has condemned the transaction as “an unlawful deal”
LONDON: Israeli journalists and media unions have voiced serious concern over a proposed sale of a major stake in Israel’s Channel 13, warning that the move could deal a devastating blow to independent journalism in the country amid a broader campaign to reshape the media landscape ahead of elections.
According to The Guardian, British billionaire Sir Leonard Blavatnik is preparing to sell a 15 percent stake in Channel 13, one of Israel’s few mainstream channels critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to telecom tycoon Patrick Drahi, a French-Israeli businessman who already owns media outlets perceived as sympathetic to the current government.
Journalists and free press advocates said the sale risked consolidating pro-government influence in a media environment already under pressure from financial sanctions, lawsuits, and regulatory threats.
The Union of Journalists in Israel has condemned the transaction as “an unlawful deal,” describing it as part of a broader “master plan to capture the media” ahead of the country’s scheduled elections.
Channel 13 has aired critical coverage of Netanyahu in recent years, including reporting on his corruption cases.
Drahi’s reported acquisition would make him a significant stakeholder at a time when Blavatnik is pulling back after years of financial losses, reported The Guardian.
Although the stake falls within the legal threshold for media ownership, critics argued that Drahi’s financial power as the only investor currently willing to inject funds would give him de facto control of editorial direction.
“While Patrick Drahi is only buying 15 percent, our fear is that by buying 15 percent, he gets 100 percent hold of the policy of the channel,” Anat Saragusti, a senior official at the Union of Journalists, told The Guardian. “It’s a lose-lose for the Israeli public, in terms of freedom of speech and diversity of opinions.”
A separate offer from a group of liberal Israeli tech entrepreneurs, reportedly valued at up to $120 million over three years, was also on the table, but ultimately rejected. A spokesperson for Blavatnik’s Access Industries insisted there was no political influence behind the deal and that Drahi’s bid was “the stronger, faster option” of the two.
“Any suggestion that the preferred offer has been selected for political reasons is entirely false,” the spokesperson said, adding that the transaction would allow Channel 13 to invest in high-quality content and digital innovation.
The Netanyahu government has come under growing scrutiny for actions seen as hostile to independent media, including imposing sanctions on the newspaper Haaretz and initiating defamation lawsuits against investigative reporters. The prime minister is also on trial for alleged efforts to trade regulatory favors for favorable press coverage, one of several corruption charges he faces.
“If Channel 13 falls, this would be the end of the free press in Israel,” Saragusti warned. “It’s the tipping point.”










