Google Wins Vertical Search Antitrust Case In Germany

In a German case that could have broader antitrust implications in Europe, Google defeated a petition for an injunction brought by a German online weather trade group, Verband Deutscher Wetterdienstleister. The case is interesting because it involves a private antitrust action against Google and directly addresses the “search bias” argument made by Google critics.

Screen Shot 2013-05-07 at 11.40.17 AM

The case and petition for injunction against Google were brought on behalf of third party publishers by the weather association. I obtained an English translation of the German court’s opinion. The translation is a bit awkward however, requiring a bit of interpretation on my part.

Below is the essence of the argument made by the petitioner against Google:

The Petitioner states that the Defendant [can] place its space-consuming weather forecast box featuring its own contents at the top in front of the list of organic search results. For a person who started a search request using the term “weather“, this means that it is no longer necessary to heed the links in the organic search list below because they can retrieve all the important information from the weather box at the top. Accordingly, the design of the search engine of the Defendant . . . results in the user being dissuaded from following the links of other providers. In consequence of the fact that these sites are less frequently visited, the providers lose advertising revenue resulting in the profitability of their business models being jeopardized.

The above, familiar argument distilled into bullets goes like this:

  • Google can put its own “weather box” at the top of search results
  • Third party weather sites become less visible (or effectively invisible in this case)
  • Visiting third party weather sites becomes less necessary or even unnecessary
  • The decline in organic traffic harms publishers and decreases revenue, jeopardizing their businesses

Google German weather box

The court rejected these arguments entirely.

It spent some time addressing the challenges of defining the market for purposes of the competition analysis. It came to the preliminary conclusion that the entire internet (including Twitter and Facebook) should be used as the relevant context for analysis. However it didn’t dispose of the injunction petition on that basis.

The German court specifically rejected the notion that Google owed any obligation or duty to the weather sites (or by implication any set of vertical-content publishers) at the expense of doing what Google considered to be right for users:

It is not the objective of the ban on the abuse of a market-controlling position to safeguard traditional business models that can no longer withstand change. The ban sought by the Petitioner would amount to precisely this: the Defendant . . . would be prevented from enhancing its search approach in that, rather than making reference solely to links of other providers, it provides its own contents direct, the reason being that what the Petitioner is claiming for itself and its members should also apply to other search terms.

Put differently: the Defendant . . . should forgo the innovation it considers to be proper so that other companies such as the members of the Petitioner are included in the result list as usual and are thus able to continue generating revenue via this placement and the advertising space thus obtained . . .

Whereas the Petitioner is aiming at leaving everything unchanged as far as possible because its members have enjoyed much success with the traditional business model in the past, the Defendant . . . is attempting to secure a position in the competitive flux. The discrimination against or threat to business models cited by the Petitioner thus proves to be a reflex reaction of dynamic competition.

Indeed the court argued that the weather association was essentially seeking to protect ad-revenue stability for its member publishers and shield them against the impact of market competition. It further asserted that Google was changing precisely in response to market forces and competition and that it had a right to do so, to provide what it regarded as the best overall user experience.

The plaintiff-petitioner Verband Deutscher Wetterdienstleister has two weeks to appeal the decision. They have not yet indicated whether they intend to do so.

The proposed antitrust settlement between Google and the European Commission (EC) is likely to happen. However, if it were for some reason to fail, the logic of this German case suggests the EC would face legal challenges were it to become involved in litigation against Google. Recognizing this, the EC will in all probability finalize the formal settlement proposal on the table after the one-month “market test” period is over.

Related Topics: Channel: Industry | Features: Analysis | Google: Antitrust | Google: Legal | Google: Outside US | Legal | Legal: Regulation


About The Author: is a Contributing Editor at Search Engine Land. He writes a personal blog Screenwerk, about SoLoMo issues and connecting the dots between online and offline. He also posts at Internet2Go, which is focused on the mobile Internet. Follow him @gsterling.

Connect with the author via: Email | Twitter | Google+ | LinkedIn


Get all the top search stories emailed daily!  


Other ways to share:

Read before commenting! We welcome constructive comments and allow any that meet our common sense criteria. This means being respectful and polite to others. It means providing helpful information that contributes to a story or discussion. It means leaving links only that substantially add further to a discussion. Comments using foul language, being disrespectful to others or otherwise violating what we believe are common sense standards of discussion will be deleted. Comments may also be removed if they are posted from anonymous accounts. You can read more about our comments policy here.
  • Wendy Piersall

    I’m curious if the case mentions where Google gets their weather data from? Is Google getting it on their own, or is it pulling the data from the sites that are being displaced? The former makes it a non-issue, but if it is the latter (and I’m guessing it is), this is just one more example of Google being the biggest, greediest content scraper of all. And if it is the latter, where exactly do we draw the line so that Google can’t continue to usurp our content for their own gains? Because they will take more and more until someone or something finally has a legal way to make them stop.

  • nicolesimon

    The reason users prefer this kind of result is simple: it is useful, not ridden with ads and it is catered toward me. Google helps me out with all kinds of information and I am excited to see the way it is going. If this would have been a decision the other way – protecting other people’s business because they do not want to innovate or make it compelling – I have asked for a long time to then give me an option box “yes I only want to see results and enhancements from google on maps, weather, calculation, exchange rates, sidebar knowledge results to relavant pages” and and and.

    So very happy about the result as a user.

  • Hassan Dibani

    Both Google and those sites get their data from national and international weather services. Most of these sites access public APIs from governmental sources and sell ads on top if it

  • A Jenner

    This is the same case for loans, credit cards and other markets. Google now participates in affiliate offers and advertises them at the top of search. So Google wants to stop affiliates promoting affiliate offers and adjusts it’s serps to reflect this stance but it’s just fine if they do so!

Get Our News, Everywhere!

Daily Email:

Follow Search Engine Land on Twitter @sengineland Like Search Engine Land on Facebook Follow Search Engine Land on Google+ Get the Search Engine Land Feed Connect with Search Engine Land on LinkedIn Check out our Tumblr! See us on Pinterest


Click to watch SMX conference video

Join us at one of our SMX or MarTech events:

United States


Australia & China

Learn more about: SMX | MarTech

Free Daily Search News Recap!

SearchCap is a once-per-day newsletter update - sign up below and get the news delivered to you!



Search Engine Land Periodic Table of SEO Success Factors

Get Your Copy
Read The Full SEO Guide