European Publishers Council files EU antitrust complaint against Google over AI Overviews use

European Publishers Council files EU antitrust complaint about Google's AI Overviews

BRUSSELS, Feb 10 (Reuters) - The European Publishers Council has complained to EU antitrust regulators about Alphabet (GOOGL.O), opens new tab unit Google's AI-generated summaries known as AI Overviews, the lobbying group said on Tuesday. "Google is using publishers' journalistic content without authorisation, without effective opt-out mechanisms, and without fair remuneration," the Council said in a statement. The complaint could reinforce the European Commission's investigation into the Google opened in December last year. Reporting by Foo Yun Chee Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab * Suggested Topics: * Boards, Policy & Regulation

European Publishers Council hits Google with EU antitrust complaint

The chair of the EPC has stated that the complaint is not about limiting innovation but rather is about preventing powerful market players from taking publishers' content without consent. Google, which falls under parent company Alphabet, is at the centre of a new antitrust complaint opened by the European Publishers Council (EPC) on Tuesday (10 February) and filed with the European Commission. The complaint argues that Google and Alphabet are abusing their dominant position in general search services via the use of AI overviews and AI mode embedded within Google Search. There are concerns that Google is using journalistic content without the necessary permissions, diverting traffic, audiences and revenue and failing to compensate the original owners of the content. The complaint stated, "By embedding AI-generated summaries and chatbot-style responses directly into its dominant search interface, Google has transformed Search from a referral service into an answer engine that substitutes original publisher content and retains users within Google's own ecosystem. "Google relies on publishers' high-quality journalistic content as a critical input for AI training, retrieval augmented generation, and output generation. Professionally produced news and editorial content is particularly valuable to AI systems because it is accurate, current, well-structured, and requires minimal cleaning." Christian Van Thillo, the chair of the EPC explained that the complaint is "not about resisting innovation or artificial intelligence", but rather it is about ensuring that dominant key players can't wield their power to take away a publisher's consent to share content, or their right to be compensated. He believes that if such practices are to continue then the damage done could be both structural and irreversible. "No amount of money can restore lost audiences, weakened brand relationships, or eroded reader trust once publishers are disintermediated. "Effective competition, media pluralism, and democratic discourse, all objectives rightly at the heart of the European Democracy Shield, depend on timely and decisive enforcement." The complaint notes that while some AI providers have entered into licensing agreements with publishers regarding the use of journalistic content, Google has largely failed to do so. The EPC said the platform has instead relied on its control of its search service to secure material without remuneration, "thereby distorting competition and undermining the emergence of a functioning licensing market for AI uses of copyrighted works". The complainants are of the opinion that publishers are left with an untenable choice. They can either remain visible on Google Search and accept that their content is crawled, reproduced, and repurposed for Google's AI features. Or opt out which could entail a loss of search visibility that most publishers cannot afford. The European Publishers Council is calling on the European Commission "to adopt remedies capable of restoring competitive conditions, including meaningful publisher control over the use of their content for AI purposes, transparency regarding content usage and impact, and a fair licensing and remuneration framework that reflects the scale and value of publishers' content." A Google representative responded to the complaint stating, "These inaccurate claims are an attempt to hold back helpful new AI features that Europeans want. We design our AI features to surface great content across the web and we provide easy-to-use controls for them to manage their content." The EPC complaint comes amid an ongoing investigation launched by The European Commission in December of 2025. The Commission opened an antitrust investigation into Google over the tech giant's use of web publishers' content and content uploaded to YouTube for the benefit of its artificial intelligence. Don't miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic's digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.

European Publishers File Antitrust Complaint Against Google AI

The European Publishers Council (EPC) has filed a formal antitrust complaint with the European Commission (EC) against Google over its AI Overviews and AI Mode features, alleging an abuse of dominance under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Article 102 TFEU does prohibit the abuse of a dominant market position where that abuse may affect trade between EU Member States and distort competition within the internal market. In its complaint, the EPC argues that Google is deploying AI-generated summaries and chatbot-style responses within Search in a way that uses publishers' journalistic content without authorisation, effective opt-out mechanisms, or fair remuneration. According to the council, Google embeds these AI responses directly into its dominant search interface, thereby transforming Search from a referral service into what the EPC describes as an "answer engine" that substitutes original reporting and retains users within Google's ecosystem. Consequently, publishers face reduced traffic, audiences, and revenues that are critical to sustaining professional journalism. The EPC urges the Commission to restore competitive conditions by mandating meaningful and enforceable publisher control over AI uses of their content, ensuring transparency on traffic and revenue impacts, and establishing a fair licensing and remuneration framework reflecting the economic value of journalism. Notably, the EC announced an antitrust investigation into Google's use of web publishers' content for AI training in December 2025. The complaint claims that Google's practices distort competition and hinder the creation of a functioning licensing market for AI-generated uses of copyrighted content. The EPC's members include major publishing groups such as DMG Media, The Guardian, News UK, and The New York Times. The complaint's executive summary outlines the following key findings: The complaint argues that AI Overviews and AI Mode systematically reduce referrals to publishers. It states that AI Overviews already appear in more than 40% of search results for informational queries. Moreover, independent studies cited estimate traffic declines of over 30% for affected queries, while some publishers report click-through reductions exceeding 50% on desktop and mobile. In addition, AI Mode's links-light or links-free interface reportedly results in fewer than 5% of queries leading to a click to an external website, concentrating value within Google's ecosystem. The EPC contends that Google uses publishers' high-quality journalistic content as a critical input for AI training, retrieval-augmented generation, and output generation. It argues that AI-generated responses reproduce and transform this material into substitutes for original works. Consequently, publishers' content functions both as input and as a competitive replacement, yet Google allegedly secures this without consent or remuneration. The executive summary states that publishers lack a realistic mechanism to prevent AI use of their content without suffering commercial harm. Although Google cites tools such as robots.txt, meta tags, and Google-Extended, the complaint describes these as ineffective or coercive in practice. Opting out typically leads to reduced visibility or complete exclusion from Google Search, which the complaint identifies as the primary gateway to online audiences. Furthermore, the complaint maintains that Google acts as an unavoidable trading partner due to its entrenched dominance in general search. It alleges that Google leverages this position to impose uniform, non-negotiable conditions that require publishers to provide content for AI purposes as the price of remaining indexed. The inability to refuse without disproportionate harm, it argues, reflects exploitative abuse under Article 102 TFEU. In addition, the complaint claims that while other AI providers have entered into licensing agreements with publishers, Google has largely avoided doing so. Instead, it allegedly relies on its control of search to access content without payment, thereby distorting competition and hindering the development of a functioning licensing market for AI uses of copyrighted works. The complaint also identifies what it describes as systematic breaches of EU copyright law, including publishers' neighbouring rights under the Digital Single Market (DSM) Copyright Directive. It argues that broad text and data mining exceptions, limited transparency under the AI Act, and ineffective technical controls render publishers' rights largely illusory, and that such regulatory non-compliance signals exploitative abuse. Finally, the executive summary states that the harm extends beyond lost revenue. Once disintermediated, publishers allegedly lose audience relationships, brand recognition, user data, and subscription conversion opportunities. It warns that smaller, regional, and specialist publishers face the highest risk of market exit, which could reduce media pluralism and weaken democratic discourse over time. This complaint matters because it sits at the intersection of competition law, copyright, and the future of digital news distribution. Recent data shows that Google's AI Overviews have reduced click-through rates by around 58%, indicating how AI summaries can divert traffic away from original publishers. In India, the Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) has proposed a "One Nation, One Licence, One Payment" model for AI training on copyrighted works. The proposal would require mandatory licensing and remuneration, with no opt-out for creators, signalling that policymakers view AI training as a compensable use rather than a free public resource. When AI systems ingest and reproduce journalistic content without meaningful consent or payment, they do not merely innovate; they reallocate economic value while damaging the very resource they draw from. Ultimately, the dispute is not just about traffic loss. It is about whether copyright law and competition rules can ensure that AI development does not erode the economic foundations of professional journalism.

European Publishers Council files EU antitrust complaint about Google's AI Overviews

BRUSSELS, Feb 10 (Reuters) - The European Publishers Council has complained to EU antitrust regulators about Alphabet unit Google's AI-generated summaries known as AI Overviews, the lobbying group said on Tuesday. "Google is using publishers' journalistic content without authorisation, without effective opt-out mechanisms, and without fair remuneration," the Council said in a statement. The complaint could reinforce the European Commission's investigation into the Google opened in December last year.