Search Neutrality

The European Commission took two decisions finding non-compliance by Google with the Digital Markets Act for self-preferencing its own services on Google Search, and for putting in place restrictions on businesses to direct consumers to alternative, often cheaper, purchase channels on Google Play. In this regard, the Commission issued Google a fine of €460 million and a fine of €430 million, respectively. 

When Google prepared to go public in 2004, Larry Page, a co-founder of the company, wrote a letter to shareholders describing the internet firm’s responsibility to the world. “We believe a well-functioning society should have abundant, free and unbiased access to high-quality information,” Page said. Google fulfilled that responsibility by acting as a gateway to the internet.

The European Commission issued two sets of binding specification measures to Google under the Digital Markets Act. The aim of the first specification measures is to ensure that competitors' Artificial Intelligence (AI) services can compete with Google's own AI services, such as Gemini, by having equal access to features on Google's Android devices.  Currently, on Android phones, competitors' AI assistants only have restricted access to key functionalities of the Google Android operating system.

On June 8, 2026, the Ohio Court of Appeals for the Fifth Appellate District unanimously affirmed a lower court ruling in State ex rel. Yost v. Google, L.L.C. (2026-Ohio-2148), rejecting Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost's argument that Google's search engine qualifies as a common carrier under Ohio common law. Under Ohio's established two-part test, a common carrier must (1) actually transport the property of others and (2) hold itself out to serve the public without discrimination—and the court found Google Search fails on both counts.

The European Commission sent its preliminary findings to Google as part of the specification proceedings it started on 27 January 2026 under the Digital Markets Act (DMA). These preliminary findings outline the draft measures Google should implement to ensure that third parties have effective access and interoperability with key capabilities of Android.

The Harris campaign has been editing news headlines and descriptions within Google search ads that make it appear as if the Guardian, Reuters, CBS News and other major publishers are on her side. It's a common practice in the commercial advertising world that doesn't violate Google's policies, but the ads mimic real news results from Search closely enough that they have news outlets caught off guard. The campaign buys search ads with news links to give voters searching for information about Vice President Harris more context.

A federal judge said on August 5 that Google broke the law to kneecap competition in web search in ways that entrenched the company’s power. The next steps, which involve proposing legal fixes to undo Google’s behavior, are essentially about imagining an alternative future in which Google isn’t Google as we know it. We have the internet we have, and it’s hard to imagine something different or if you’d like it more, but here are six possible alternati

Google acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in online search, Judge Amit Mehta of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled, a landmark decision that strikes at the power of tech giants in the modern internet era and that may fundamentally alter the way they do business. Judge Mehta said that Google had abused a monopoly over the search business.

In his new book “Techlash: Who Makes The Rules In The Digital Age?”, former Federal Communications Commission Chairman Tom Wheeler says regulators have failed to rein in Big Tech because they’re using outdated tools. Call it something like “regulatory futurism”—Wheeler is saying now is the time for the government to get innovative by setting up new agencies with wide-reaching powers to determine what is and isn’t in the public’s best interest when it comes to tech.

Broadband companies have long practiced net neutrality and do not block, throttle, or unfairly prioritize content. We support legislation that codifies into law open internet protections across consumers’ online experience. Only modern net neutrality rules can deliver the full protections all consumers deserve. This requires modern rules that apply not only to broadband, but also to online commerce, search, social media and other areas where significant real-world neutrality concerns have emerged. Such key points include the following: