Google’s appeal against EU record £3.8bn fine begins – how did we get here?
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.
Google’s appeal will be heard in Luxembourg from Monday
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.
Standard Oil controlled more than 90% of US oil production at its height
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.”
The Commission accused Google of attempting to cement the dominance of Google Search
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.
The US Department of Justice has filed charges against Google
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.
Lawyers for Luigi Mangione have called on a judge to block federal prosecutors from seeking the death penalty against him.
Mangione’s legal team says the 27-year-old’s case has been turned into a “Marvel movie” after a failed bid by the US Justice Department to indict him on terrorism charges over the fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson in New York on 4 December.
New York state judge Gregory Carro said there was no evidence that the killing, which took place as Mr Thompson walked into an investor conference at the New York Hilton Midtown hotel, amounted to a terrorist act.
But Judge Carro upheld second-degree murder charges, which suggest there was malicious intent – but not that it was premeditated.
US Attorney General Pam Bondi has called for Mangione to face capital punishment, describing the charges against him as a “premeditated cold-blooded assassination that shocked America”.
But in the new court filing, Mangione’s legal team argues federal prosecutors have “violated Mr Mangione’s constitutional and statutory rights” by “staging a dehumanizing, unconstitutional ‘perp walk’ where he was televised, videotaped, and photographed clambering out of a helicopter in shackles” on the way to his first court appearance.
The legal team, led by former Manhattan prosecutor Karen Friedman Agnifilo, also claims the death penalty case has been “fatally prejudiced” after President Donald Trump commented on it on Fox News.
Despite laws that prohibit any pre-trial commentary that could prejudice the defendant’s right to a free trial, he told the network on Thursday: “Think about Mangione. He shot someone in the back, as clear as you’re looking at me or I’m looking at you.”
Read more from Sky News
Trump throws out New York Times lawsuit
Free speech warning after Kimmel taken off air
Songwriter killed in small plane crash
UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson.
Pic: UnitedHealth Group/AP
The defence team’s 114-page court filing reads: “There is a high bar to dismissing an indictment due to pretrial publicity.
“However, there has never been a situation remotely like this one where prejudice has been so great against a death-eligible defendant.”
Federal prosecutors have until 31 October to respond to the documents.
Mangione has pleaded not guilty to all the state charges against him, which cannot result in the death penalty and only life imprisonment, unlike federal ones. He has also pleaded not guilty to the federal charges.
He is due back in court for a pre-trial hearing in the state case on 1 December and the federal case on 5 December.
The 27-year-old was arrested five days after Mr Thompson was killed – when he was spotted at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania, around 230 miles west of New York City.
Journalists at the Pentagon have been told they could be barred if they gather or report information that officials haven’t approved first.
Reporters’ access to the iconic building, the headquarters of the US defence department, is also being curtailed.
Pete Hegseth, the defence secretary, posted on X: “The ‘press’ does not run the Pentagon – the people do.
“The press is no longer allowed to roam the halls of a secure facility. Wear a badge and follow the rules – or go home.”
A memo announcing the changes was sent to reporters on Friday, informing them “information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if it is unclassified”.
They must sign an agreement agreeing to the new rules or face having their press pass revoked.
Journalists’ groups said it was a dangerous move that would seriously restrict their ability to hold defence officials to account.
The National Press Club called it “a direct assault on independent journalism at the very place where independent scrutiny matters most: the US military”.
The Society of Professional Journalists said it “would deny the American people the transparency and accountability they deserve”.
“This policy reeks of prior restraint – the most egregious violation of press freedom under the First Amendment – and is a dangerous step toward government censorship,” it said.
“Attempts to silence the press under the guise of ‘security’ are part of a disturbing pattern of growing government hostility toward transparency and democratic norms.”
The Pentagon is home to the newly rebranded Department of War
The defence department – which recently rebranded itself as the Department of War – said it “remains committed to transparency to promote accountability and public trust”.
However, it stated that disclosing information – even if unclassified – without consent was a potential national security risk.
Read more from Sky News:
US talk show hosts react to Kimmel cancellation
Judge throws out Trump’s $15bn lawsuit against NY Times
The first year of US President Donald Trump’s second term has seen several embarrassing episodes for the Pentagon.
A journalist revealed in March that he had accidentally been included on a group chat, which included the defence secretary and vice president, discussing plans to attack Houthi rebels in Yemen.
The Pentagon said no classified information had been shared but opponents said it showed a worryingly lax approach that could endanger US troops.
Doubts were also raised about America’s bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites earlier this year after a leaked intelligence report suggested the attack had only set the regime back “by months”.
President Trump and the CIA both hit back hard against the report, with the president insisting the underground facilities had been “blown to kingdom come”.
A man has been killed and several other people injured in a shooting at a US country club hosting a wedding, police in New Hampshire have said.
Aerial pictures above the Sky Meadow Country Club in Nashua show emergency responders at the scene.
A suspect was detained at the scene by police officers who said “a single male had entered the club and fired several shots”.
Eyewitness reports said the country club was hosting a wedding, and diners were also eating at its restaurant when the suspect entered and began shooting people.
New Hampshire congresswoman Maggie Goodlander said in a statement she was “closely monitoring the tragic reports” and that her heart was with the victims, their families and the entire community.
Ambulances park outside a hotel acting as a reunification centre after the shooting. Pic: AP
Pic: AP
At a news conference, Peter Hinkley, senior assistant attorney general of New Hampshire, said “people don’t think things like this happen on a Saturday night in Nashua in New Hampshire”.
Nashua is about 45 miles (70 kilometres) northwest of Boston, just across the Massachusetts border. It is the only city in America to be ranked Number 1 Best Place to Live by Money magazine twice.
Forbes magazine ranked it America’s seventh most liveable city.
Attorney general John Formella and Nashua Police Department chief Kevin Rourke issued a statement:
“This evening officers responded to 911 calls from the Sky Meadow Country Club in Nashua for reports of gunshots.
“From investigation, a single adult male entered the club and fired several gunshots. One adult male was shot and killed, and several other people were wounded.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment12 months agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024