Google sues EU over orders to open search, AI data to rivals

Summary

• Google filed challenges at the EU General Court against two July 2026 Digital Markets Act enforcement decisions.
• The orders would force data sharing with search competitors and AI access for rivals including OpenAI.
• Compliance was set for 2027; an appeal could delay Europe's toughest test of AI competition rules.

The latest

Two European Commission enforcement decisions issued in July 2026 are now before the EU General Court in Luxembourg, after Google filed legal challenges on Monday, Reuters reported. The orders, issued under the Digital Markets Act, would compel the company to hand search data to competing search engines and open capabilities available through its Gemini model to rival AI developers.

Details

• The first order: One contested decision requires Google to share search data with search-engine competitors seeking access to its search services, according to Reuters. It is one of the most direct attempts yet by Brussels to force open the underlying data layer of the dominant general search engine rather than regulate its interface.
• The second order: The other decision requires Google to open AI services to rival AI developers seeking access to capabilities available through the Gemini model, Reuters reported. OpenAI is specifically named among the AI rivals identified as needing that access, making the case a test of how the DMA applies to generative AI.
• Google's privacy argument: Google argues the requirements would force it to share people's private search history without sufficient anonymisation, according to Reuters. The company frames the potential exposure as irreversible harm to user privacy, positioning the appeal as a data-protection dispute rather than purely a competition fight.
• The Android claim: Google also contends the measures would weaken vital security protections on Android, Reuters reported. The company has not published a technical breakdown of which protections it considers at risk, nor detailed what alternative safeguards it proposed to the Commission during the enforcement process.
• The rebuttal: DuckDuckGo, which supports the EU's position, countered that the anonymisation framework is robust and that the only thing an appeal buys Google is time, according to Reuters. The search rival is among the competitors that would gain access under the first contested order.
• The timeline: The compliance measures were scheduled to take effect in 2027, Reuters reported. The Commission issued the underlying enforcement decisions in July 2026, meaning Google moved within roughly two months to contest them before the Luxembourg court.
• The venue: The challenges were filed at the EU General Court, the bloc's first-instance court for actions against Commission decisions. No hearing date or ruling timetable has been announced, and the court has not indicated whether the contested obligations are suspended while the case proceeds.
• What is not settled: Neither the scope of the data Google would have to release nor the technical standard for anonymisation has been publicly defined in the terms reported. The dispute over whether the existing framework is sufficient is now the substantive question before the judges.

Background

The Digital Markets Act designates large platforms as gatekeepers and imposes obligations on them, including data access for rivals. Enforcement decisions issued under it can be contested directly before the EU General Court, the route Google has taken here.

Between the lines

The two orders split along different lines of exposure. The search-data order touches Google's historic business, while the Gemini order extends gatekeeper obligations into generative AI, with OpenAI named as a beneficiary. DuckDuckGo's argument that the appeal mainly buys time points to the gap between the July 2026 decisions and the 2027 compliance date as the real contested ground.

What's next

Watch for the General Court to set a procedural timetable, any decision on whether the obligations stay in force during litigation, and whether the 2027 compliance date holds.

Source: Reuters (via Investing.com)