Google has criticized the European Union’s intentions to achieve digital sovereignty through open-source software. The company warned that Brussels’ policies aimed at reducing dependence on American tech companies could harm competitiveness. According to Google, the idea of replacing current tools with open-source programs would not contribute to economic growth.
Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs and chief legal officer, warned of a competitive paradox that Europe is facing. According to the Financial Times, he said that creating regulatory barriers would be harmful in a context of rapid technological advancement. His remarks came just days after the European Commission concluded a public consultation assessing the transition to open-source software.
Google’s chief legal officer clarified that he is not opposed to digital sovereignty, but recommended making use of the “best technologies in the world.” Walker suggested that American companies could collaborate with European firms to implement measures ensuring data protection. Local management or servers located in Europe to store information are among the options.
The EU is preparing a technological sovereignty package aimed at eliminating dependence on third-party software, such as Google’s. After reviewing proposals, it concluded that reliance on external suppliers for critical infrastructure entails economic risks and creates vulnerabilities. The strategy focuses not only on regulation but also on adopting open-source software to achieve digital sovereignty.
According to Google, this change would represent a problem for users. Walker argues that the market moves faster than legislation and warns that regulatory friction will only leave European consumers and businesses behind in what he calls “the most competitive technological transition we have ever seen.” As it did with the DMA and other laws, Google is playing on fear. Kent Walker suggested that this initiative would stifle innovation and deny people access to the “best digital tools.”
The promotion of open-source software aims to break dependence on foreign suppliers, especially during a period of instability caused by the Trump administration. The European Union has highlighted the risks of continuing under this system and proposes that public institutions should have full control over their own technology.
According to a study on the impact of open-source software, the European Commission found that it contributes between €65 billion and €95 billion annually to the European Union’s GDP. The executive body estimates that a 10% increase in contributions to open-source software would generate an additional €100 billion in growth for the bloc’s economy.
The EU currently has stronger Anti-Trust laws than the North American countries so most a lot of what is public comes from their courts.
This wiki is a good start.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitrust_cases_against_Google_by_the_European_Union
The case with Mozilla is the most obvious in terms of funding direct competition to maintain the semblance of competition with Chrome. Google really dislike adblockers so they've been throwing their weight around with Mozilla and the HTML5 protocols (as best I understand it) to prevent people from using adblockers in the future.
One of the first instances that I can recall was when Google acquired Youtube. There were critics who worried about the lack of competition in video hosting. Google assured legislators that things were fine because they still had Google Video at the time. Controlling those two allowed them to dominate the video hosting space. Google video was eventually phased out, with hosting being diverted to Youtube.
IIRC Google were also throwing their weight around when it came to buying up portions of the wireless spectrum in the US. Again, to prevent other, smaller organizations from gaining a foothold in the mobile industry (they made deals with providers who carried their phones, iirc.
These are mostly off the top of my head from watching their practices over the last 20 years or so there may be corrections to all of this.
Sorry for not having more direct sources for you but I will continue looking for some and will update when I get a chance.
Edit: Another open-source example is Google's investment in 'Accelerated Mobile Pages' - this is what I was referring too when I said google wants Webtraffic directed through them.