Google appeals against EU order to share data

LUXEMBOURG, 30 SEPTEMBER 2026 —

Google has formally appealed to the European Union’s General Court in Luxembourg against regulatory measures announced in July that mandate the tech giant share search data with rival engines and grant competing artificial intelligence services greater access to the Android operating system.

The legal challenge marks the latest escalation in the ongoing regulatory clash between Google and Brussels under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), a framework designed to curb the dominance of large tech companies in key digital markets. By taking the case to the General Court, Google is seeking to overturn specific obligations that it argues are disproportionate and harmful to consumer interests.

The appeal comes at a critical juncture for the global tech sector, where regulators in Europe are aggressively enforcing new rules aimed at fostering competition in digital markets that have long been dominated by a handful of major players.

According to the European Commission, Google must begin sharing search data with rival search engines starting in January 2027. The regulator stated that this measure is necessary to “rebalance the playing field” for competitors who have historically struggled to gain traction against Google’s entrenched market position. In parallel, changes to the Android operating system are also due to take effect next year.

These modifications are designed to give competing AI assistants access to the same features currently available to Google’s own services, such as Gemini. Under the new rules, users would be able to activate a rival assistant by voice or instruct it to carry out tasks within other applications, thereby reducing the lock-in effect of Google’s proprietary ecosystem.

Oliver Bethell, Google’s senior director for competition, stated that the company is appealing decisions that will force it to share people’s private search history without sufficient anonymisation and weaken vital security protections on Android. Bethell emphasized the sensitivity of the data involved, noting that people use search engines for their most personal questions, ranging from medical worries to close relationships.

He argued that mandating the sharing of these personal queries without adequate safeguards would cause irreversible harm to user privacy. Google further contends that Android is already open to other services and that the search data requirements lack adequate safeguards, user knowledge, and consent.

The European Commission, however, maintains that the measures announced in July include robust protections for users’ privacy and device security. The regulator clarified that search data would be anonymised before being shared with competitors. Additionally, Google would retain the ability to assess whether a specific recipient poses serious security or data protection risks before data is transferred.

The Commission’s stance suggests that the regulatory framework is designed to balance competitive fairness with the protection of individual user data, a position Google disputes in its legal filings.

This appeal is part of a broader pattern of enforcement actions by the European Commission against Google. In a separate case concluded in July, the Commission fined Google €890 million for favouring its own services in search results and restricting app developers from directing customers to other ways of buying their products. That fine highlighted the regulator’s focus on anti-competitive practices that limit consumer choice and innovation.

The current dispute over data sharing and AI access adds another layer to this complex legal and regulatory landscape, where the definitions of fair competition in the digital age are being actively tested in European courts.

For the broader technology sector, the outcome of this appeal could set significant precedents for how dominant platforms are required to interact with competitors. If the General Court upholds the Commission’s measures, it would reinforce the DMA’s authority to mandate interoperability and data sharing as tools for market correction. Conversely, a ruling in Google’s favour could limit the scope of regulatory intervention in the internal operations of major tech firms.

The case underscores the tension between the EU’s goal of creating a more competitive digital single market and the concerns of tech giants regarding the security and privacy implications of forced data access.

The next steps in this legal battle will depend on the proceedings at the General Court in Luxembourg, where Google will present its arguments against the Commission’s decisions. The timing of the appeal, filed just weeks after the initial measures were announced, indicates Google’s determination to challenge the regulatory burden before the compliance deadlines arrive.

As the EU continues to implement the DMA, this case will be closely watched by industry stakeholders, policymakers, and consumers who are affected by the evolving rules governing digital services in Europe. The resolution of this dispute will likely influence future regulatory approaches to data portability and platform interoperability across the region.

Related: Google · European Commission · Oliver Bethell · Luxembourg