The European Parliament strongly backs a resolution calling for Google to split its search engine from its multitude of other business. However, many believe the non-binding resolution is simply for show more than anything else.
Four hundred fifty-three members of the European Parliament voted in favor of a resolution that proposed for the breakup of search engines, while 174 voted against and 56 abstained from the voting. The resolution, which is more symbolic rather than enforceable, does not explicitly mention Google's name. However, it is calling the European Commission "to consider proposals with the aim of unbundling search engines from other commercial services".
Google owns a huge majority of the search market in Europe. With a 90 percent market share, Google holds dominance across the pond than with the 65 percent search market share it owns in the United States. Clearly, the resolution, which calls for the commission to "prevent any abuse in the marketing of interlinked services by operators of search engines", is meant for Google.
"When using search engines, the search process and results should be unbiased in order to keep Internet searches non-discriminatory, to ensure more competition and choice for users and consumers and to maintain the diversity of sources of information," says the resolution.
"For interlinked services, search engines must guarantee full transparency when showing search results," it adds and further calls on the European Commission to "prevent any abuse in the marketing of interlinked services by search engine operators."
Google, which is currently up to its knees in legal troubles with the European Union, is the subject of a four-year antitrust investigation being led by competition commissioner Margrethe Vestager, who took over from former commissioner Joaquin Almunia in November. Almunia previously rejected calls to split Google's search engine, but failed to reach a favorable settlement with Google as the terms proposed were said to be hugely beneficial for the company. Vestager was less assertive, saying that she will need time to decide the necessary steps as the issues are "multifaceted and complex".
The resolution entails complaints coming from Google's rivals, mostly U.S. companies that are in direct competition with Google's host of non-search services. For example, travel booking sites TripAdvisor, Expedia and Hotwire, which provide services that compete directly with Google's flight and hotel search, figure prominently in the Google opposition in Europe. The complaints accuse Google of using anti-competitive and unfair search practices that favor its own products over that of other companies. Searching for hotels, for instance, would bring up Google's own results from its hotel search service ahead of TripAdvisor and Expedia.
The authors of the resolution, German Andreas Schwab of the Christian Democrat party and Spanish Ramon Tremosa i Balcells of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, say they are regular Google users and have no problem with Google itself but with the existing monopoly that Google holds to prevent other search engines from posing competition.
"Monopolies in whatever market have never been useful, neither for consumers not for the companies," Schwab tells Reuters.
However, a number of politicians and commentators have expressed their concern over the highly political nature of the resolution, saying that the heavy lobbying thrown by various Google competitors at the European Union should not interfere in allowing a free market play out by itself for the benefit of consumers.
"Parliament should not be engaging in anti-Google resolutions, inspired by a heavy lobby of Google competitors or by anti-free market ideology, but ensure fair competition and consumer choice," says lawmaker Sophie in't Veld of the ALDE liberal group.
Members of the Commission have also spoken to European news outlets saying they do not support the motion. Digital economy commissioner Günther Oettinger proposals such as those made by the Parliament are "instruments of the planned economy, not the market economy." Vice president of the Commission Andrus Ansip also weighed in on the matter, saying such issues should only be decided after a full public debate.
"We have some doubts about misuse of gatekeeper positions and also leading positions in the market," Ansip says.
Even high-ranking American officials have called upon Parliament not to inject politics in a regulatory issue. In a letter addressed to leaders of the Parliament, house judiciary committee chairman Sen. Bob Goodlatte says the resolution is "encouraging antitrust enforcement efforts that appear to be motivated by politics, rather than grounded in factual and legal principles."
However, the FairSearch consortium, which represents Google competitors, stresses that the resolution does not only target Google but all search companies.
"The whole thing is blown out of proportion," says FairSearch lawyer Thomas Vinje. "The resolution doesn't call for a breakup, and voting up or down doesn't actually vote for or against the proposition."
