The EU has launched an antitrust investigation into Google's AI

On December 9, 2025, the European Commission announced a new round of antitrust investigation against Google, focusing on its use of online content to train artificial intelligence (AI) models. This move marks a crucial step for the EU in digital governance, integrating AI technology competition rules into the traditional antitrust framework, reflecting a profound adjustment in the global tech power structure.

I. Core of the Investigation: Doubts over Data Control and Market Dominance

The EU's investigation centers on two major disputes: First, whether Google has used content from web publishers and YouTube creators to train AI models without authorization and without providing reasonable compensation or opting-out options; second, whether Google has created a "data privilege" for AI training by restricting third-party access to YouTube data. For instance, the EU alleges that Google redirects traffic from news websites to its own AI tools while prohibiting other developers from using YouTube content to develop competing models. This "playing both referee and player" behavior is suspected of distorting fair competition in the AI service market.

From a technical perspective, the performance of AI models is highly dependent on extensive data training. As the world's largest search engine and video platform, Google's data scale and diversity are irreplaceable. If it monopolizes key data resources through its platform advantage, it will not only squeeze the survival space of small and medium-sized innovators but also potentially form a "data-algorithm-market" closed-loop monopoly, hindering the diversified development of AI technology. The EU's investigation directly targets this core contradiction, attempting to break down data barriers through antitrust tools and maintain market openness.

II. Historical Context: From Search to AI, the EU's Continuous Pressure

The EU's antitrust supervision over Google is not new. Since 2017, Google has been fined three times for abusing its dominant market position: 2.42 billion euros in 2017 for favoring its own comparison shopping service in search results; 4.34 billion euros in 2018 for pre-installing apps on Android devices; and 2.95 billion euros in September 2025 for self-preferencing in online advertising technology. This AI investigation can be seen as an extension of this regulatory chain, reflecting the EU's continuous vigilance against the power expansion of tech giants.

It is worth noting that the EU's regulatory strategy shows an upgrading trend from "behavior to structure". Early penalties mainly targeted specific business practices (such as search ranking and pre-installation agreements), while this investigation directly points to the core asset of the AI era - data. This shift is in line with the legislative spirit of the EU's Digital Markets Act (DMA), which incorporates the data-sharing obligations of "gatekeeper" platforms into mandatory requirements, aiming to reshape the digital power structure through rule reconstruction.

III. Deep-seated Motivations: Europe's Digital Sovereignty and Industrial Protection

Behind the EU's tough regulation lies its strategic consideration of digital sovereignty and industrial security. Currently, the core technologies of AI are dominated by Chinese and American enterprises. Although Europe has a huge digital market, it lacks local leading platforms. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen once said, "Europe cannot become a digital colony." Through anti-monopoly investigations, the EU aims to achieve three goals: first, increase the compliance costs for external enterprises to enter the European market, providing a research and development window period for local AI enterprises; second, embed "European values" (such as data privacy and non-discrimination) into AI governance rules, and build a global standard centered on the EU; third, respond to domestic public concerns about the concentration of power of tech giants and strengthen the political legitimacy of regulatory agencies.

IV. Global Impact: A New Battlefield in the Technology Game

The EU's actions have triggered a chain reaction. US President Donald Trump threatened to launch a "Section 301 investigation" in retaliation, highlighting the intensification of transatlantic digital governance differences. At the same time, economies such as China and South Korea are also strengthening anti-monopoly legislation in the AI field, and global technology competition is upgrading from the technical level to the rule level.

For Google, this investigation may force it to adjust its AI strategy: on the one hand, it needs to re-evaluate the compliance of data acquisition and even open some data interfaces; on the other hand, it may face the risk of business division (such as separating YouTube from the AI department). For the global AI industry, the EU's "high regulatory standards" may drive the industry to form a "dual compliance" model - enterprises need to meet different regulatory requirements in Europe and the United States simultaneously. This may increase innovation costs, but it may also give rise to a more sustainable technological development path.