On Wednesday, as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was testifying at his second public hearing before a committee on Capitol Hill this week, the European Union's Article 29 Working Party (WP29)issued its own press release entitled "Sorry is not enough": WP29 establishes a Social Media Working Group. Full press release embedded below following this excerpt:
The UK Information Commissioner’s take on a ‘game changing’ few weeks in data protection: "As a data controller we must be prepared for the GDPR like anyone else but, for the ICO, 25 May means we must be ready to regulate the GDPR. That’s an additional challenge…We’re expecting more of everything. More breach reports because the law requires it in high risk cases. More complaints, because people will be better informed of their rights. Greater engagement as organizations turn to us for advice at the outset"--Elizabeth Denham.
"The Facebook scandal has three aspects:
→ #DataProtection: we are equipped to remedy the situation with #GDPR
→ Fraud: national authorities have to address it with criminal justice
→ Electoral freedom: we need to know more about what happened" says Commissioner @VeraJourovapic.twitter.com/1SUpSrDoCH
— European Commission 🇪🇺 (@EU_Commission) April 11, 2018
Glad to hear that #Facebook wants to use EU #DataPrivacy standards as their global model. We will observe with great interest how the letter - and the spirit - of the law are applied. #GDPR comes into force on 25th May. https://t.co/liqG0az0yQ
EU's Vestager Sees 'No Reason' Google Shouldn’t Comply
June 27, 2017: European Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager discusses the EU’s antitrust case against Google and compliance from the company. She speaks with Bloomberg.com's David Westin on "Bloomberg Daybreak: Americas."
source: European Commission
"... Google has abused this market dominance by giving its own comparison shopping service an illegal advantage. It gave prominent placement in its search results only to its own comparison shopping service, whilst demoting rival services. It stifled competition on the merits in comparison shopping markets. Google introduced this practice in all 13 EEA countries where Google has rolled out its comparison shopping service, starting in January 2008 in Germany and the United Kingdom. It subsequently extended the practice to France in October 2010, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain in May 2011, the Czech Republic in February 2013 and Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Poland and Sweden in November 2013 ....
"The Commission Decision requires Google to stop its illegal conduct within 90 days of the Decision and refrain from any measure that has the same or an equivalent object or effect. In particular, the Decision orders Google to comply with the simple principle of giving equal treatment to rival comparison shopping services and its own service: Google has to apply the same processes and methods to position and display rival comparison shopping services in Google's search results pages as it gives to its own comparison shopping service.
"It is Google's sole responsibility to ensure compliance and it is for Google to explain how it intends to do so. Regardless of which option Google chooses, the Commission will monitor Google's compliance closely and Google is under an obligation to keep the Commission informed of its actions (initially within 60 days of the Decision, followed by periodic reports).
"If Google fails to comply with the Commission's Decision, it would be liable for non-compliance payments of up to 5% of the average daily worldwide turnover of Alphabet, Google's parent company. The Commission would have to determine such non-compliance in a separate decision, with any payment backdated to when the non-compliance started.
"Other Google cases The Commission has already come to the preliminary conclusion that Google has abused a dominant position in two other cases, which are still being investigated. These concern: 1) the Android operating system, where the Commission is concerned that Google has stifled choice and innovation in a range of mobile apps and services by pursuing an overall strategy on mobile devices to protect and expand its dominant position in general internet search; and 2) AdSense, where the Commission is concerned that Google has reduced choice by preventing third-party websites from sourcing search ads from Google's competitors.
"The Commission also continues to examine Google's treatment in its search results of other specialised Google search services. Today's Decision is a precedent which establishes the framework for the assessment of the legality of this type of conduct. At the same time, it does not replace the need for a case-specific analysis to account for the specific characteristics of each market. Background See also Factsheet. [embed further below] Today's Decision is addressed to Google Inc. and Alphabet Inc., Google's parent company. Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Article 54 of the EEA Agreement prohibit abuse of a dominant position. Today's Decision follows two Statements of Objections sent to Google in April 2015 and July 2016.More information on this investigation is available on the Commission's competition website in the public case register under the case number 39740." [emphasis added]--European Commission - Press release - Antitrust: Commission fines Google €2.42 [US$2.73] billion for abusing dominance as search engine by giving illegal advantage to own comparison shopping service (embed below):
The European Commission has hit Apple with a record-breaking tax penalty of up to €13bn after finding the US tech group enjoyed a quarter of a century of illegal state support from Ireland that distorted competition in Europe. FT.com explains the dispute.
European Commission - State aid: Ireland gave illegal tax benefits to Apple worth up to €13 billion | europa.eu 30 August 2016: "The European Commission has concluded that Ireland granted undue tax benefits of up to €13 billion to Apple. This is illegal under EU state aid rules, because it allowed Apple to pay substantially less tax than other businesses. Ireland must now recover the illegal aid. Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, in charge of competition policy, said: "Member States cannot give tax benefits to selected companies – this is illegal under EU state aid rules. The Commission's investigation concluded that Ireland granted illegal tax benefits to Apple, which enabled it to pay substantially less tax than other businesses over many years. In fact, this selective treatment allowed Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."..."
Vestager said under the tax avoidance scheme Apple was allowed to allocate almost all sales profits to a head office that “only existed on paper.” She said this head office “has no employees, it has no premises, and it has no real activities ... [and] was subject to no tax in Ireland or elsewhere.”
Customer Letter - Apple (IE) | apple.com: "... The Commission’s move is unprecedented and it has serious, wide-reaching implications. It is effectively proposing to replace Irish tax laws with a view of what the Commission thinks the law should have been. This would strike a devastating blow to the sovereignty of EU member states over their own tax matters, and to the principle of certainty of law in Europe. Ireland has said they plan to appeal the Commission’s ruling and Apple will do the same. We are confident that the Commission’s order will be reversed ..."--Tim Cook, Apple Inc.
UPDATE September 3, 2015: Security firm BlueCoat says stay away from .XYZ sites [Google Alphabet's website is abc.xyz] and that Google newgTLD dotZIP should be "blocked" --seeSecurity Firm Recommends Blocking ICANN's "Shadiest" New gTLDs UPDATE September 1, 2015:
UPDATE August 28, 2015: European Publishers Play Lobbying Role Against Google - The New York Times: "... Even Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, whose European interests include the British newspapers The Times and The Sun and The Wall Street Journal Europe, joined the fray, urging the European Commission last fall to take action against Google, which it labeled a “platform for piracy.” ... Mr. Almunia left the investigation to his successor, Ms. Vestager, who announced antitrust charges against Google in April. Many publishers backed the move, saying the company’s business model had limited online choice for consumers. “Europe’s publishers are well-organized, well-connected and a really powerful lobby,” said Stefan Heumann, director of the European digital agenda program at the New Responsibility Foundation, a Berlin-based research organization. “Many of them are struggling to grasp the realities of the new digital world.” UPDATE:FairSearch statement regarding Google's response to the Statement of Objections - FAIR SEARCH: Brussels, 27 August 2015 – "We have seen this movie before. Defendants in big European antitrust cases have made the same arguments. Just like Google here, they have argued that the EC is incorrectly defining the market in which harm is occurring. They also argued, just like Google now, that even if one accepts the EC’s market definition, there was no harm to competition in that market. And they argued, again like Google today, that the antitrust authorities just don’t get it, and that the remedy they demand cannot be implemented without causing technical and market chaos. The truth, as in previous cases, is that the Commission has properly defined the market into which Google has leveraged its overwhelming dominance in search, namely the shopping (price) comparison market. Google has decimated competition in that market by preferencing its own product comparison service in its search results, and consumers have been harmed — and paid higher prices – because Google has cornered the shopping comparison market. And the truth is that the Commission understands the markets and the technology very well, and Google is perfectly capable of implementing a remedy that provides equal treatment both to its own product comparison service and to those of others. The Commission is completely correct that this is the only remedy that is principles-based and future-proof. Please see our chronology for details of the case."
Google today responded to the European Commission claims (Statement of Objections) that Google breached EU antitrust rules--
Google and Shopping video (above) published August 27, 2015 - "Since Google was founded, we have worked to make it easier for people to find what they are looking for. We have a simple belief: focus on the user, and all else will follow. This is at the heart of how we show products in Search, in which we show users the most relevant results by working directly with merchants to present accurate specs, trustworthy reviews, competitive prices and the quickest means of purchase. While technology and behaviors may evolve and change, our focus on the user will always remain the same."
"Google has always worked to improve its services, creating new ways to provide better answers and show more useful ads. We’ve taken seriously the concerns in the European Commission’s Statement of Objections (SO) that our innovations are anti-competitive. The response we filed today shows why we believe those allegations are incorrect, and why we believe that Google increases choice for European consumers and offers valuable opportunities for businesses of all sizes ... Our response provides evidence and data to show why the SO’s concerns are unfounded. We use traffic analysis to rebut claims that our ad displays and specialized organic results harmed competition by preventing shopping aggregators from reaching consumers. Economic data spanning more than a decade, an array of documents, and statements from complainants all confirm that product search is robustly competitive. And we show why the SO is incorrect in failing to consider the impact of major shopping services like Amazon and eBay, who are the largest players in this space ... Moreover, the ways people search for, compare, and buy products are rapidly evolving. Users on desktop and mobile devices often want to go straight to trusted merchants who have established an online presence. These kinds of developments reflect a dynamic and competitive industry, where companies are continuing to evolve their business models and online and offline markets are converging..." -- Kent Walker, Google SVP & General Counsel, Google Europe Blog: Improving quality isn’t anti-competitive
Background: European Commission - Antitrust: Commission sends Statement of Objections to Google on comparison shopping service; opens separate formal investigation on Android: "Brussels, 15 April 2015: The European Commission has sent a Statement of Objections to Google alleging the company has abused its dominant position in the markets for general internet search services in the European Economic Area (EEA) by systematically favouring its own comparison shopping product in its general search results pages. The Commission's preliminary view is that such conduct infringes EU antitrust rules because it stifles competition and harms consumers. Sending a Statement of Objections does not prejudge the outcome of the investigation.
The Commission has also formally opened a separate antitrust investigation into Google's conduct as regards the mobile operating system Android. The investigation will focus on whether Google has entered into anti-competitive agreements or abused a possible dominant position in the field of operating systems, applications and services for smart mobile devices.
EU Commissioner in charge of competition policy Margrethe Vestager said: "The Commission's objective is to apply EU antitrust rules to ensure that companies operating in Europe, wherever they may be based, do not artificially deny European consumers as wide a choice as possible or stifle innovation".
"In the case of Google I am concerned that the company has given an unfair advantage to its own comparison shopping service, in breach of EU antitrust rules. Google now has the opportunity to convince the Commission to the contrary. However, if the investigation confirmed our concerns, Google would have to face the legal consequences and change the way it does business in Europe."
"I have also launched a formal antitrust investigation of Google’s conduct concerning mobile operating systems, apps and services. Smartphones, tablets and similar devices play an increasing role in many people's daily lives and I want to make sure the markets in this area can flourish without anticompetitive constraints imposed by any company."" For further information:
EU Commission priority – digital single market - European Commission: The Digital Single Market Strategy briefing by the European Commission on 6 May 2015, 12:00 Noon, Wednesday, Central European Time (CET) which is 7:00 AM EDT in the US--Vice-President Andrus Ansip, in charge of the Digital Single Market, and Commissioner Günther H. Oettinger, in charge of Digital Economy and Society, will be at the noon briefing to present the Strategy--watch LIVE: EC Audiovisual Service - EbS Live. Three main areas for action were defined on March 25th: (1) better access for consumers and businesses to digital goods and services across Europe; (2) creating the right conditions and a level playing field for digital networks and innovative services to flourish; (3) maximising the growth potential of the Digital Economy.
"Government” is a bad word in the United States, the lackeys of the corporations have branded it so. As a result, most corporate behavior proceeds unchecked, no matter how nefarious. But not in Europe." --Bob Lefsetz (Lefsetz Letter, infra)
European Commission - Press release - Antitrust: Commission sends Statement of Objections to Google on comparison shopping service; opens separate formal investigation on Android: "Brussels, 15 April 2015 -- The European Commission has sent a Statement of Objections to Google alleging the company has abused its dominant position in the markets for general internet search services in the European Economic Area (EEA) by systematically favouring its own comparison shopping product in its general search results pages. The Commission's preliminary view is that such conduct infringes EU antitrust rules because it stifles competition and harms consumers. Sending a Statement of Objections does not prejudge the outcome of the investigation.
"The Commission has also formally opened a separate antitrust investigation into Google's conduct as regards the mobile operating system Android. The investigation will focus on whether Google has entered into anti-competitive agreements or abused a possible dominant position in the field of operating systems, applications and services for smart mobile devices.
"EU Commissioner in charge of competition policy Margrethe Vestager said: "The Commission's objective is to apply EU antitrust rules to ensure that companies operating in Europe, wherever they may be based, do not artificially deny European consumers as wide a choice as possible or stifle innovation".
"In the case of Google I am concerned that the company has given an unfair advantage to its own comparison shopping service, in breach of EU antitrust rules. Google now has the opportunity to convince the Commission to the contrary. However, if the investigation confirmed our concerns, Google would have to face the legal consequences and change the way it does business in Europe."
"I have also launched a formal antitrust investigation of Google’s conduct concerning mobile operating systems, apps and services. Smartphones, tablets and similar devices play an increasing role in many people's daily lives and I want to make sure the markets in this area can flourish without anticompetitive constraints imposed by any company...."
You can read the Google response here: Official Google Blog: The Search for Harm: ".... we respectfully but strongly disagree with the need to issue a Statement of Objections and look forward to making our case over the weeks ahead. "-- Amit Singhal, Senior Vice President, Google Search
Best commentary on all this so far? Blogger Bob Lefsetz: Google Antitrust Case - Lefsetz Letter: "It’s the beginning of the end. Once someone starts investigating you for the sins of the past, your future is screwed. Google is in trouble... Google’s money machine depends on desktop search, it doesn’t work on mobile, on mobile the app rules, Facebook is the king of mobile search, that’s why their stock is going up. Google got greedy... Google isn’t content with all that AdWords money. It’s got to mess with the results themselves... this is why the European Commission is coming down on Google... And now Google is caught up in this rearguard skirmish that is preventing them from moving forward into mobile. But mobile is next. The European Commission is investigating Android, to see if licensees are forced to install Google apps.... (read more at link above)
EU Pushes to Globalize Internet Governance - WSJ.com: "The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, will propose on Wednesday the adoption of "concrete and actionable steps" to globalize essential Web functions—including the assignment of so-called top-level domain names, such as ".com" or ".org"—that remain contractually linked to the U.S. government, according to a draft policy paper seen by The Wall Street Journal...."
