Preiskel & Co advised the Independent Publishers Alliance, a nonprofit community of independent publishers in a complaint filed to the European Commission in July 2025.
In the complaint, we emphasised that Google’s AI Overviews have caused, and continues to cause, significant harm to publishers, including news publishers, by systematically scraping and repurposing their content and placing it at the top of the search results page. This conduct suppresses competing publishers’ visibility, diverts user traffic and dramatically reduces click-through rates. Industry has reported declines in website traffic of 70% or more, causing severe and immediate damage to publishers’ revenues and business operations. This distorts competition, stifles innovation, and undermines democratic societies by eroding media plurality and restricting freedom of expression online.
Last year’s Draghi Report[1] set out three key priorities to revive sustainable growth in the EU, led by the need to close the innovation gap with the United States and China. It found that the widening productivity divide between Europe and the US has been driven largely by digital technologies. Yet, the Report also pointed to artificial intelligence – especially generative AI – as a rare area where European companies still have a chance to take the lead. That opportunity matters because the EU remains weak in many emerging technologies that are expected to power future growth.
It is against this backdrop that the European Commission’s antitrust investigation into Google’s use of web publishers’ content for its AI Overviews and AI Mode[2] should be understood. Far from a routine competition case, it signals Brussels’ determination to shape the AI market on its own terms – and to ensure that Europe’s last, best chance to close the innovation gap is not swallowed up by US tech giants.
The investigation breaks new ground, targeting supply-side exploitative harm. A timeline of under 2 years is expected; the Commission has a strong record of wins in abuse of dominance cases. The official announcement and terms used by Commissioner Ribera are also groundbreaking. Much has been made of the Commission’s new approach to competition law enforcement[3], but few have noticed what that means to Commissioner Ribera. In announcing the AIO case, her official statement said:
“A free and democratic society depends on diverse media, open access to information, and a vibrant creative landscape. These values are central to who we are as Europeans. AI is bringing remarkable innovation and many benefits for people and businesses across Europe, but this progress cannot come at the expense of the principles at the heart of our societies. This is why we are investigating whether Google may have imposed unfair terms and conditions on publishers and content creators, while placing rival AI models developers at a disadvantage, in breach of EU competition rules.”
Commissioner Ribera’s statement frames competition law as a means to promote the public policy objectives enshrined in Articles 2 and 3 of the Lisbon Treaty. Article 2, which enumerates fundamental values such as freedom, democracy, and equality, seeks to foster “a society in which pluralism … prevails.” A single news source dominating Google’s AI Overviews would directly undermine media plurality.
The Complaint to the Commission raised the point that the purpose of competition law is to deliver public policy goals as set out in Articles 2 and 3. The above is one of the first statements indicating this to be in the Commission’s consideration.
The investigation signals Commissioner Ribera putting the Draghi Report’s ambitions into practice. It reflects a growing awareness in Brussels of how Google – and other US Big Tech firms – can leverage their entrenched dominance of the digital economy to secure early and potentially decisive advantages in AI. This investigation, alongside the parallel case opened against Meta[4], illustrates Commissioner Ribera’s determination to prevent powerful multinationals from using their market strength to privilege their own AI services and squeeze out competitors. Crucially, it is about keeping the field open long enough for European AI companies to compete – and, maybe, to win.
The material in this article is only for general review of the topics covered and does not constitute legal advice. No legal or business decision should be based on its content. This article is written in the English language. Preiskel & Co LLP is not responsible for any translation of all or part of its content into any language.
Please contact Tim Cowen if you have any questions
[1] The Draghi report on EU competitiveness, 9 September 2024
[2] Commission opens investigation into possible anticompetitive conduct by Google, 9 December 2025
[3] A new approach to competition policy? Reflections on Ribera’s first year, 11 December 2025
[4] Commission opens antitrust investigation into Meta’s new policy, 4 December 2025