Google’s appeal against EU record £3.8bn fine begins – how did we get here?

Published

4 years ago

September 21, 2021

admin

Three years after receiving a record fine from the European Commission alongside an order to stop abusing its control of the Android operating system, Google is set to have its day in court.

Back in 2018 the company was fined €4.34bn (£3.8bn) for forcing phone makers to pre-install apps including Google Search and Chrome to the exclusion of other search engines and web browsers.

The fine was a fraction of the €116bn (£99bn) parent company Alphabet recorded in revenues that year, but the real cost to the company was the threat to its future income if smartphones landed in consumers’ hands without Google apps already installed.

Google’s five-day appeal against the decision is being heard at European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, where the company hopes to have the Commission’s decision annulled in its entirety.

A failure to do so could completely reshape the smartphone landscape, but other challenges targeting Google inside the US pose a far more significant risk to the company and could lead to the search giant being broken up into several smaller businesses.

Breaking up monopolies

While there are an over-abundance of comparisons between the oil industry of the late 19th century and the tech industry of today, the slow movement of regulators is one of the most striking similarities.

It was in 1890 that US Congress passed a law to tackle the monopolies which had sprung up over the preceding half century, but it took more than three decades for that law to be used to break up Standard Oil, a company which by 1904 controlled more than 90% of oil production in America.

Standard Oil’s business excelled due to its innovations in refining oil, but also because the company had rapaciously acquired rivals and used its commercial heft to strike deals with railroad companies (themselves a target for early antitrust action) at discounted rates which the remaining oil businesses could not compete with.

In a landmark ruling in 1911, the US Supreme Court upheld that Standard Oil was an illegal monopoly and ordered it to be broken up into 34 independent companies. Though that power is not available to the European Commission, there is a growing movement in the US calling for similar actions to be taken against tech giants whom some believe are guilty of the same anticompetitive practices.

Modern antitrust law

Google is a very different company to Standard Oil, but the alleged unfairness of its practices – using its control of Android to force phone manufacturers who want to include the Google Play app store on their phones to also pre-install Google Search and Chrome – follows the same model of undermining rivals.

The investigation into Google coercing phone manufacturers formally began in 2015, although the Commission made its first enquiries about the company’s practices in 2013 when an association of Google’s rivals calling itself FairSearch lodged a complaint against its business practices.

The ruling came three years later in 2018 and now, three years later, Google’s appeal has reached the European Court of Justice. Thomas Vinje, counsel to FairSearch and partner at law firm Clifford Chance, told Sky News he expected there could be another appeal after the hearing in Luxembourg.

“Antitrust enforcement is not, on its own at least, sufficiently robust, sufficiently effective, to be able to address these really extraordinary concerns. I’m not sure the world has ever faced a situation where there is such a concentration of power in such a central element of today’s economy, and antitrust law is not up to the task,” he said.

“That is largely because they’re complex cases,” Mr Vinje explained.

“They’re more complex than rail roads or oil distribution – I’m not saying those are simple – but the issues faced in Big Tech today are a hell of a lot more complicated. So there is a hell of a lot more room for obfuscation… and dragging things out.

“So by virtue of the completely appropriate rights that defendants have in these cases, the cases just take too long.”

What is Google’s response and appeal?

Google, which claims the most popular search term on rival search engines such as Bing is the word “Google” itself and which controls more than 90% of the market for web searches, disputes the Commission’s arguments about its dominance, although that won’t feature prominently in its arguments next week.

In a news briefing ahead of the hearing, the company explained to journalists that it believes a lot has changed in the years since the Commission issued its decision.

Key to Google’s appeal is the argument that its control ensures Android is a platform which can run across millions of smart devices made by different manufacturers, increasing the economic benefits for developers – including rival web browser makers such as Opera, which is supporting Google’s appeal – and ultimately consumers.

Google will note that a revenue sharing agreement it had with phone manufacturers and mobile network operators, cited as an illegal contractual restriction by the Commission, ended in 2014.

The company also strongly disputes the way that the Commission calculated the €4.34bn (£3.8bn) fine, something the Commission said was “calculated on the basis of the value of Google’s revenue from search advertising services on Android devices” inside the European Economic Area.

What is the threat in the US?

Even if Google succeeds in getting the Commission’s decision annulled or amended, it faces three more challenges in the US which are backed by severe powers to tackle monopolies.

The first complaint was filed last October in a case led by the Trump administration’s Department of Justice and joined by 11 states – though with apparent bipartisan support – charging Alphabet with “unlawfully maintaining monopolies in the markets for general search services”.

It followed a congressional report which accused Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google of monopolising the digital market and recommended antitrust laws be used to break them up.

Two more cases were brought against Google in December.

One from the attorneys general of 35 states accuses the company of anticompetitive practices in order to retain its dominance in search, while another filed by the attorneys general from 10 states focuses on the company’s monopoly power in digital advertising markets.

Google has denied engaging in anticompetitive practices.

US

Dismissal of criminal charges against opponents derails Trump’s revenge tour

Published

4 hours ago

November 25, 2025

admin

Dismissal of criminal charges against opponents derails Trump's revenge tour

The revenge tour has come off the rails.

Donald Trump had long promised retribution against his political enemies, but – to coin a phrase used around the White House – he’s f****ed around and found out that it doesn’t fly so easily through the courts.

His mistake was in choosing a pilot unable to fly the plane.

Lindsey Halligan is the lawyer who took the job of Trump-enforcer when others, better qualified, turned it down.

The prosecution of Trump’s adversaries would have been the job of Erik Siebert, US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, but he gave it a body swerve.

He had declined to prosecute the case against Letitia James, the New York attorney-general who successfully prosecuted the Trump organisation for business fraud.

Siebert concluded there were not sufficient grounds to prosecute, which didn’t please the president, and Seibert quit before he was pushed.

A number of career prosecutors were similarly reluctant to take the case, leaving Trump checking availability.

That’s when he turned to Lindsey Halligan, an insurance lawyer by trade.

Her work experience didn’t necessarily suit the job brief – the prosecutor with the highest of profiles had no prosecutorial experience.

In pursuing the cases against Comey and James, she had to present evidence before a grand jury, something she hadn’t done before.

If that wasn’t ideal, that wasn’t all.

Something else Halligan didn’t have was the legal ability to do the job. Her appointment violated laws limiting the ability of the justice department to install top prosecutors.

It was an elementary error that didn’t pass by Judge Cameron Currie, who called it a “defective appointment”.

In setting aside the indictments against Comey and James, she wrote: “I conclude that all actions flowing from Ms Halligan’s defective appointment… constitute unlawful exercises of executive power.”

The US Department of Justice can appeal the move, so Comey and James haven’t reached road’s end.

But it’s a significant boost for both, and a significant blow for Trump.

He is the president in pursuit of sworn enemies, which his critics characterise as a weaponisation of the justice system.

Those same critics will point to the haste and impropriety on display as evidence of it, and take heart from a system offering a robust resistance.

Donald Trump appears undeterred. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said: “The facts of the indictments against Comey and James have not changed, and this will not be the final word on this matter.”

Letitia James is charged with bank fraud and making false statements to a financial institution. James Comey was charged with making false statements and obstructing a congressional investigation.

Trump fired Comey in 2017, while he was overseeing an investigation into alleged Russian interference in the Trump 2016 campaign.

US

US hails ‘tremendous progress’ on Ukraine peace plan – but says negotiators ‘need more time’

Published

4 hours ago

November 25, 2025

admin

US hails 'tremendous progress' on Ukraine peace plan - but says negotiators 'need more time'

The US secretary of state has hailed a “tremendous amount of progress” on peace talks after the US and Ukraine delegations met in Geneva – but said that negotiators would “need more time”.

Marco Rubio said the meetings in Switzerland on Sunday have been “the most productive and meaningful” of the peace process so far.

He said the US was making “some changes” to the peace plan, seemingly based on Ukrainian suggestions, “in the hopes of further narrowing the differences and getting closer to something that both Ukraine and obviously the United States are very comfortable with”.

Mr Rubio struck an optimistic tone talking to the media after discussions but was light on the details, saying there was still work to be done.

“I don’t want to declare victory or finality here. There’s still some work to be done, but we are much further ahead today at this time than we were when we began this morning and where we were a week ago for certain,” Mr Rubio said.

He also stressed: “We just need more time than what we have today. I honestly believe we’ll get there.”

Sky News’ defence analyst Michael Clarke said on the initial US-Russian 28-point peace plan that it was Donald Trump against the world, with maybe only Moscow on his side.

Mr Rubio praised the Ukrainian attitude towards the talks and said Mr Trump was “quite pleased” after he previously said in a social media post that Ukraine’s leaders had expressed “ZERO GRATITUDE” for US efforts.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said in his nightly address on Sunday that there are signs that “President Trump’s team hears us”.

In a news release on Sunday evening, the White House said the day “marked a significant step forward”.

“Ukrainian representatives stated that, based on the revisions and clarifications presented today, they believe the current draft reflects their national interests and provides credible and enforceable mechanisms to safeguard Ukraine’s security in both the near and long term,” it claimed.

Despite diplomatic progress in Geneva the finish line remains a long way off

John Sparks

International correspondent

@sparkomat

We’ve witnessed a day of determined and decidedly frantic diplomacy in this well-heeled city.

Camera crews were perched on street corners and long convoys of black vehicles swept down Geneva’s throughfares as the Ukrainians worked hard to keep the Americans on side.

Secretary of state Marco Rubio did not want to go into details at a press “gaggle” held at the US Mission this evening, but he seemed to think they had made more progress in the last 96 hours than the previous 10 months combined.

The Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy also seemed satisfied enough, posting on Telegram that there were “signals President Trump’s team is hearing us” after a day of “numerous meetings and negotiations”.

That said, we are a long way from the finish line here – something Rubio acknowledged when he said that any proposal agreed here would have to be handed over to the Russians.

At that point, negotiations to stop the war would surely get tougher.

President Putin has shown little or no inclination to stop the conflict thus far.

This, then, is the most important reason the Ukrainians seem determined to keep the Americans on side.

European leaders have presented a counter proposal to the widely criticised US-Russian peace plan, with suggestions including a cap on Ukraine’s peacetime army and readmitting Moscow into the G8.

This will only take place if the plan is agreed to by the US, Russia and Ukraine, and the G7 signs off on the move. Russia was expelled after annexing Crimea in 2014.

The counter proposal also includes US guarantees to Ukraine that mirror NATO’s Article 5 – the idea that “an armed attack against one NATO member shall be considered an attack against them all”.

The initial peace plan was worked up by the White House and Kremlin without Ukraine’s involvement, and it acquiesces to many of Russia’s previous demands.

It covers a range of issues – from territorial concessions to reconstruction programmes, the future Ukrainian relationship with NATO and the EU, and educational reforms in both Ukraine and Russia.

US and Ukrainian officials are set to meet again today to continue work on the proposal.

It has also been reported that President Zelenskyy could travel to the US as early as this week to discuss the most sensitive aspects of the plan with President Trump.

US

‘Couple of points of disagreement’ over Ukraine peace plan, says White House

Published

6 hours ago

November 24, 2025

admin

'Couple of points of disagreement' over Ukraine peace plan, says White House

The White House says there are still a “couple of points of disagreement” over the Ukraine peace plan.

The US and Ukraine said in a joint statement they had drafted a “refined peace framework” after discussions in Geneva on Sunday.

Europe tabled a counter-proposal to a US-Russia draft peace plan for Ukraine, both of which compromised of 28 points.

But speaking on Monday night, the Ukrainian president said: “As of now, after Geneva, there are fewer points – no longer 28 – and many of the right elements have been taken into account in this framework.

“There is still work for all of us to do together to finalise the document, and we must do everything with dignity.”

White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said there were “just a couple of points of disagreement” and the revised plan would need to be put to the Russians.

“There is a sense of urgency,” she added. “The president wants to see this deal come together, and to see this war end.”

Following a US-backed 28-point plan, Ukraine’s European allies drew up a counter-proposal.

The counter-proposal would halt fighting at present front lines, leaving discussions of territory for later, and include a NATO-style US security guarantee for Ukraine.

Moscow, which described the initial reported US plan as a potential basis for an agreement, rejected the European version.

Mr Trump, who had accused Ukraine of not being grateful enough for US military support while the talks were under way, on Monday suggested the process could be moving in the right direction.

He had earlier given Ukraine until Thursday to agree to the plan, but US secretary of state Marco Rubio downplayed the deadline, saying officials could keep negotiating.

In a message on his Truth Social platform, the US president said: “Is it really possible that big progress is being made in Peace Talks between Russia and Ukraine???

“Don’t believe it until you see it, but something good just may be happening.”

His latest comments come after he said Ukraine leadership had expressed “ZERO GRATITUDE” for US efforts in a longer post on Sunday.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Ukraine’s allies in the “coalition of the willing” – a broad term for about 30 countries supporting Kyiv – will hold discussions about the negotiations on Tuesday by video.

Mr Trump on Monday held a phone call with China’s President Xi Jinping, where they discussed bringing the Ukraine war to an end, the White House said.

Mr Xi urged “all parties” in the conflict to “reduce differences”, according to Chinese state news agency Xinhua.

He reiterated that China supported all efforts conducive to peace.

China has remained a consistent ally of Russia throughout its invasion of Ukraine, and is the top buyer of Russian oil, along with India.