Google’s protracted legal defense against a historic European Union antitrust fine is on the verge of collapse. An influential adviser to the EU’s highest court recommended on Thursday that judges reject the tech giant’s appeal, paving the way to finalize a record €4.12 billion ($4.4 billion) penalty for abusing the dominance of its Android operating system.
The opinion from Advocate General Juliane Kokott is a watershed moment, representing a major blow to Google and a powerful endorsement of the European Commission’s decade-long campaign to rein in Big Tech. While not legally binding, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) follows such advice in the vast majority of cases, signaling that the landmark fine, first levied in 2018, is likely to be upheld in a final ruling expected in the coming months.
At the core of the case is the EU’s finding that Google illegally leveraged its control over the world’s most popular mobile operating system to entrench its search engine monopoly. In her assessment, Kokott concluded that Google used its dominant position and the resulting network effects to lock device makers into pre-installing its apps, allowing it to harvest user data to further improve its own services, as detailed in a report from Politico. The fine is the largest of three major antitrust penalties, totaling over €8 billion, that the EU has imposed on the company.
Beyond Android: A Widening War on Multiple Fronts
The Android decision, while significant, is just one battle in a much broader regulatory war the European Commission is waging against Google. The company’s lucrative advertising technology business is the subject of another high-stakes investigation that officials are now reportedly wrapping up. This probe examines whether Google’s control over the entire ad-tech supply chain—from publisher tools to advertiser platforms—constitutes an illegal monopoly that stifles competition and harms media outlets.
The pressure on this front is intensifying from all sides. In January, a group of 18 former European leaders issued a public letter calling for the structural breakup of Google’s ad business, a move they argued was essential for “safeguarding democracy from the escalating threats of unchecked power and foreign influence.”
This sentiment has been echoed on the streets, where advocacy groups recently held a protest outside the Commission’s antitrust headquarters, delivering petitions demanding a breakup. Max Bank, a campaigner for LobbyControl, declared, “Google’s monopoly abuses its market power and undermines democracy on the internet. Google is too powerful.” Adding to the pressure, a coalition of over 30 European media organizations from 17 countries filed a lawsuit against Google in February 2024, seeking €2.1 billion in damages for its alleged anticompetitive ad-tech practices. For its part, Google has stated it is engaging constructively with the Commission, reiterating its commitment to creating value for publishers and advertisers.
Echoes in America: The DOJ’s Chrome Gambit
This transatlantic regulatory pincer movement has a powerful counterpart in Google’s home country. The United States Department of Justice is pursuing its own aggressive antitrust action, having already secured a landmark court ruling in August 2024 that found Google guilty of monopolistic practices. In the wake of that victory, the DOJ has pushed for sweeping structural remedies, most notably recommending that Google be forced to divest its Chrome browser.
The DOJ’s goal, detailed in court documents, is to dismantle what it sees as an anticompetitive feedback loop where the world’s most popular browser funnels users directly to the world’s most dominant search engine. A decision on this and other potential remedies is imminent; the presiding judge is expected to issue a final ruling by August 2025. Google has vehemently opposed the proposed measures, arguing they go far beyond the scope of the court’s initial decision.
The ‘Brussels Effect’: A New Global Template
The EU’s robust regulatory framework, particularly its Digital Markets Act (DMA), is increasingly serving as a blueprint for governments worldwide, a phenomenon often dubbed the “Brussels Effect.” This expanding global influence is creating a complex and challenging compliance landscape for U.S.-based tech giants. Nations including Japan and the United Kingdom are now actively developing their own DMA-style legislation to regulate digital gatekeepers.
Turkey is also moving to implement its own Big Tech regulations modeled directly on the EU’s framework. This trend highlights a global shift towards holding platforms accountable for their market power. Interestingly, this regulatory push is not universally opposed in the American tech scene.
In a surprising move, influential U.S. startup accelerator Y Combinator urged its own government to back the DMA, arguing that it fosters a more competitive environment for innovation. “Far from being a ‘Europe vs. America’ issue, the DMA’s pro-competition framework aligns with core American antitrust principles by decentralizing market power and opening doors for entrepreneurship.”
Taken together, the events of this week are far more than a single legal setback for Google. They represent a clear and coordinated global challenge to the business models that have allowed a handful of tech giants to dominate the digital economy. The final ECJ ruling on the Android fine, coupled with the looming decisions in the EU ad-tech case and the U.S. remedies trial, will not only shape Google’s future but also set the definitive rules of engagement for the entire tech industry for the next decade.
