Transcript Google Adsense

GOOGLE SHOPPING
& GOOGLE ADSENSE
GOOGLE UNDER FIRE FROM
EUROPE’S ANTITRUST REGULATOR
PLAN OF THE PRESENTATION

Part 1 : The facts
•
•
•

Part 2 : Legal analysis of the Commission’s preliminary conclusion
•
•

What is Google Shopping and Google Adsense ?
The context
What is Google blamed for ?
The Commission’s preliminary conclusion
The legal analysis (art. 102 TFEU)
Part 3 : Critical and personal opinions
PART 1
THE FACTS

GOOGLE SHOPPING
•
•
•

What is Google Shopping ? It’s a price comparison service specialized
in the search for products.
Context : Google’s comparison service is the first result that appears
on top of the page in its general search results pages, before those of its
competitors
What is Google blamed for ? Having abused of its dominant position by
systematically favouring its own comparison shopping service in its
general search results.
GOOGLE ADSENSE
•
•
•
•
What is Google Adsense ? It’s the Google’s advertising agency. It
involves three parties (advertiser; advertising agency; web publisher).
What is « Google Adsense for search » ? It’s a free product which allows
the web publisher to place a Custom Search Engine on his website to
provide users with web search.
Context : Whenever a user enters a search query, in addition to the
search results, Google search ads are also displayed. Moreover,
Google has imposed restrictions in the contracts with its direct
partners.
What is Google blamed for ? Having abused of its dominant position by
artificially restricting the possibility of third party websites to display
search advertisments from Google’s competitors.
GOOGLE SHOPPING
ONLINE
SEARCH
Horizontal search:
general web search
service
Vertical search:
specialised search
services as Google
Shopping
GOOGLE ADSENSE
GOOGLE
ADSENSE
=
Google’s entire ad
business on third
party websites
GOOGLE ADSENSE FOR
SEARCH
=
Platform through which
Google places search ads
on third party websites
(through a search box on
those sites)
Google shopping : illustration
Google Adsense for search : illustration
PART 2
LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE
COMMISSION’S PRELIMINARY
CONCLUSION

GOOGLE SHOPPING
Commission’s preliminary conclusion : Google has abused of its dominant position by
systematically favouring its own comparison shopping service in its general search
results pages. According to the Commission :
•
•

These practices may artificially divert traffic from rival comparison shopping
services and hinder their ability to compete on the market

Consumers do not necessarily see the most relevant results

It stifles innovation
Legal analysis (art. 102 TFEU)

Relevant market ? Market for comparison shopping

Dominant position ?


Market shares around 90% on the market of general search => Google uses its
dominance in search to favor its own service on the shopping market

Strategic barriers due to Google’s behavior ?
Abuse ?

Foreclosure : The Google’s anti-competitive conduct has weakened or even
marginalized competition from its closest rivals.

Consumer harm : The users do not necessarily see the most relevant results
and therefore they are limited in their choices.

GOOGLE ADSENSE
•
•
Commission’s preliminary conclusion : Google has abused of its dominant position by
artificially restricting the possibility of third party websites to display search
advertisements from Google’s competitors. According to the Commission, these
practices have artificially reduced :
 The opportunities for Google’s competitors on this market
 The ability of third party websites to invest in providing consumers with choice
 Innovative services
Legal analysis (art. 102 TFEU)
 Relevant market ? Market for search advertising intermediation
 Dominant position ?
 Google has been owning 80% of the market shares for the last ten years in the
market for search advertising intermediation in the European Economic Area
(EEA).
 Strategic barriers due to Google’s behavior ?
 Abuse ?
 Foreclosure : Google’s conduct has prevented existing and potential
competitors from entering and growing in the market of online search
advertising.
 Consumer harm : By reducing the opportunities for its competitors, Google
reduces the ability for these competitors to provide consumers with choice and
innovative service.
PART 3
CRITICAL AND PERSONAL OPINIONS
Do we think Google should be sanctionned ?

Google Shopping : several elements against Google
•
•
•

Lack of cooperation
« Proposed commitments » rejected
Additional evidences
Google Adsense : mixed feelings
•
•
More investigations needed
Google has recently changed its contracts
BUT, in both cases, the legal elements can be discussed, such as the
existence of a dominant position and of an abuse