European Publishers Council hits Google with EU antitrust complaint

Google Faces Antitrust Storm as European Publishers Accuse AI Overviews of Hijacking Journalism

In a seismic legal showdown that could reshape the future of AI, journalism, and the internet itself, the European Publishers Council (EPC) has launched a blistering antitrust complaint against Google and its parent company Alphabet, accusing them of abusing their search dominance to hijack publishers’ content without consent, compensation, or even a fair chance to opt out.

The controversy centers on Google’s AI Overviews and AI Mode—automated features that generate summaries and chatbot-style answers directly within Google Search. According to the EPC, these tools have transformed Google from a referral service into a self-contained answer engine, siphoning off audiences, ad revenue, and brand relationships from the original content creators.

“Google is no longer sending users to publishers—it’s keeping them inside its own ecosystem,” said Christian Van Thillo, chair of the EPC. “This isn’t about resisting innovation or AI. It’s about stopping a dominant gatekeeper from taking publishers’ content without consent, without fair compensation, and without giving publishers any realistic way to protect their journalism.”

The EPC’s complaint, filed with the European Commission on February 10, 2026, argues that Google’s AI features rely heavily on high-quality journalistic content—material that is accurate, current, well-structured, and invaluable for training AI systems. Yet, while some AI providers have struck licensing deals with publishers, Google has largely refused to do so, instead leveraging its control over search to extract content for free.

Publishers are now caught in what the EPC calls an “untenable choice”: remain visible on Google Search and accept that their content will be crawled, reproduced, and repurposed for AI features, or opt out and risk losing the search traffic they depend on to survive.

The stakes couldn’t be higher. The EPC warns that if these practices continue, the damage could be “structural and irreversible”—eroding media pluralism, undermining democratic discourse, and leaving publishers unable to rebuild lost audiences or restore reader trust.

A Google spokesperson pushed back, calling the claims “inaccurate” and framing the dispute as an attempt to “hold back helpful new AI features that Europeans want.” The company insists its AI tools are designed to surface great content across the web and that publishers have easy-to-use controls to manage their material.

But the EPC isn’t backing down. It’s demanding that the European Commission impose remedies to restore competitive conditions—including meaningful publisher control over AI use of their content, transparency about how content is used, and a fair licensing and remuneration framework that reflects the true value of journalism.

This latest clash is just the latest chapter in a growing global backlash against Big Tech’s AI practices. In December 2025, the European Commission opened its own antitrust investigation into Google’s use of web publishers’ content and YouTube uploads for AI training. Meanwhile, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority has proposed measures to let publishers opt out of Google’s AI Overviews, and in September 2025, Penske Media—owner of Rolling Stone, Billboard, and Variety—sued Google and Alphabet over the same issue.

As regulators on both sides of the Atlantic sharpen their focus on AI and antitrust, one thing is clear: the battle for control over the internet’s most valuable commodity—information—is only just beginning.

Tags & Viral Phrases:
Google AI Overviews, European Publishers Council, antitrust complaint, AI Mode, Google Search monopoly, journalism under threat, AI content theft, publisher opt-out crisis, media pluralism at risk, Google vs. publishers, AI training data, European Commission investigation, UK CMA intervention, Penske lawsuit, Silicon Republic Daily Brief, tech giants vs. journalism, future of AI and news, content licensing battle, digital ecosystem control, audience hijacking, brand relationship erosion, democratic discourse under fire, irreversible damage to publishing, gatekeeper power abuse, fair compensation for content, AI answer engine, web traffic diversion, search visibility crisis, AI-generated summaries, chatbot-style responses, Google ecosystem lock-in, content crawling without consent, high-quality journalism exploitation, minimal content cleaning for AI, retrieval augmented generation, Google’s market dominance, publisher control over AI use, transparency in content usage, licensing and remuneration framework, structural and irreversible harm, timely and decisive enforcement, European Democracy Shield objectives, AI features that Europeans want, easy-to-use content controls, helpful new AI features, inaccurate claims, attempt to hold back innovation, dominant gatekeeper, disintermediated publishers, lost audiences, weakened brand relationships, eroded reader trust, media pluralism, democratic discourse, timely and decisive enforcement, European Democracy Shield, structural and irreversible, untenable choice, opt out of AI usage, loss of search visibility, functioning licensing market, competitive conditions, meaningful publisher control, transparency regarding content usage, fair licensing and remuneration framework, scale and value of publishers’ content, inaccurate claims, attempt to hold back helpful new AI features, easy-to-use controls, manage their content, ongoing investigation, antitrust investigation, web publishers’ content, YouTube uploads, AI training, Competition and Markets Authority, proposed measures, opt out of AI Overviews, Penske Media, Rolling Stone, Billboard, Variety, lawsuit against Google, parent company Alphabet, AI Overviews, Silicon Republic Daily Brief, need-to-know sci-tech news.

,