ICOMP on Google Android fine

Consumers have a right to choose. This has been denied them by Google through an intricate system of abusive practices aimed at locking competition out and users in. The Android strategy is similar to other Alphabet Google products under investigation: Undercut and dominate competition by dumping Android free of charge, tie and bundle Google products … read more

Internet giants must end anti-competitive practices or face being broken up

A guest post from ICOMP counsel Tim Cowen Internet giants such as Facebook and Google must end anti-competitive “kill in the crib” practices or face sanctions including being broken up, says think tank ResPublica The think tank, ResPublica, warns that the practice of buying up potential competitors is one of many problems in the technology … read more

Google: EC prohibition decision publication timing

PaRR asked leading competition lawyers when they expect the recent Google EC prohibition decision (Search Comparison Shopping) to be made public by the commission. Their 12 July 2017 piece titled EC Google public decision seen coming quickly – lawyers comes to the conclusions: Google seen keen to stretch cofidentiality process, delay damages claims Extensive negotiations … read more

OIP and ICOMP join forces

    Paris / Brussels The Open Internet Project and ICOMP are proud to announce that all ICOMP Council members are joining OIP in addition to their continuing ICOMP membership. With 20 new members joining from ICOMP, OIP becomes the first pro-European association, resolute to its commitment to fight any GAFA’s abuses of dominant position. … read more

ICOMP Statement: CCI Charges Against Google

The filing of substantial charges against Google by India’s competition commission, the CCI, as reported in Indian and global media, represents a major step towards ending Google’s anti-competitive behaviour. It follows three years of detailed investigation of complaints in India. With competition authorities in both India and the EU now presenting formal statements clearly articulating … read more

Google in Denial

Today’s blog post from Google is, unfortunately, simply another attempt to divert attention away from the devastating impact their self-preferencing has had on the online market, making many of the same old arguments we have seen before. Commissioner Vestager has been clear that in her view Google’s systematic self preferencing of its own comparison shopping … read more

The Simple Application of European Competition Rules

Former President of the General Court of the European Union has recently published a paper regarding the essential facility doctrine with regards to the Google case. In his paper, in which he acknowledges he has undertaken paid research for Google, Mr Vesterdorf essentially argues that the Commission’s case is flawed because Google is not an … read more

Responding to Googlespeak: Part 4

Myth 4: Competitors don’t want us to include our own services in search results. In characterizing the Commission’s SO, Google claims it is based on allegations by competitors that “Google’s practice of including our own specialized results…in search have significantly harmed their businesses” (emphasis added).   Fact 4: Competitors just want Google to let them … read more

Responding to Googlespeak: Part 3

Myth 3: That there are other specialized online services proves we’ve done nothing wrong. Google claims that the continued existence of other comparison shopping services shows that the Commission’s “allegations of harm” are “wide of the mark.”   Fact 3: Google’s manipulation of search results harms consumers and competition. The Commission’s SO focuses on the … read more