UK Marketing Group Files Antitrust Complaint Against Google's Privacy Sandbox

Lobbying Efforts Intensify Against Google’s Privacy Sandbox

A collective of digital marketing companies and associated organizations has escalated its opposition to Google’s plans to discontinue support for tracking cookies. They argue that the proposed replacement technologies, intended to enhance user privacy, are anti-competitive.

This group, now known as the “Movement for an Open Web” (MOW), formerly “Marketers for an Open Web”, has formally filed a complaint with the European Union’s antitrust regulators.

Complaint Details and Proposed Remedies

The MOW asserts it has provided the European Commission with evidence detailing the impact of Google’s technological shifts on both competition and user choice. They have also suggested potential solutions to address their concerns.

Both Google and the Commission have been approached for statements regarding this complaint.

Ongoing Regulatory Scrutiny

The EU initiated an investigation into Google’s advertising technology practices earlier this year, with an in-depth probe announced in June. This investigation specifically includes an examination of the Privacy Sandbox proposal.

A similar investigation was launched in the U.K. in January, and remains under review by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). Google has indicated a willingness to offer concessions in response to the U.K. inquiry.

MOW’s Recommendations to EU Regulators

MOW proposes that Google be required to provide advance notification to the EU regarding any modifications to its browser, Chrome/Chromium. This would allow for assessments of privacy and competition implications, mirroring a remedy previously proposed to U.K. regulators.

The campaign, initially driven by marketers, now seemingly advocates for user privacy, a point highlighted by the EU’s focus on this area within its antitrust investigation.

Lack of Transparency Regarding Membership

The MOW’s website currently does not disclose the identities of its members, only naming its director, James Rosewell, co-founder of 51 Degrees, a U.K. mobile marketing firm.

The organization states it is supported by businesses with combined annual revenues exceeding $40 billion, and that its membership has expanded beyond marketing companies due to growing concerns about the Privacy Sandbox.

Statements from MOW Leadership

James Rosewell stated: “The internet was originally envisioned as an open environment, free from control by any single entity. While Google claims these changes are for privacy, without proper oversight, they pose a threat to digital media, online privacy, and innovation.”

He continued, “Solutions must align with existing laws, not be driven by the self-serving interests of Big Tech. Increasing personal data collection by fewer companies does not enhance privacy, but rather stifles competition and boosts profits.”

Tim Cowen, legal advisor to MOW and chair of the antitrust practice at Preiskel & Co LLP, added: “We are requesting the EU Commission to establish a level playing field for all digital businesses and protect the open web. Google’s claims of strengthening ‘privacy’ are misleading; their proposal resembles a data mining operation.”

Google’s Response and Timeline Adjustments

Google has already postponed its implementation timeline for Privacy Sandbox, announcing in June that the transition away from tracking cookies would take longer due to ongoing discussions with the U.K.’s antitrust regulator.

The company has also committed not to phase out tracking cookies unless the CMA is satisfied that the transition to alternative technologies will safeguard both competition and privacy.

MOW’s Strategy and Potential Outcomes

MOW appears to be capitalizing on the situation, seeking a broader, pan-European freeze on Google’s Privacy Sandbox initiative, rather than solely focusing on U.K.-specific safeguards.

Dr. Lukasz Olejnik, a privacy researcher and consultant, suggests the Commission may view the complaint as supporting evidence in its existing investigation, potentially leading to a gradual accumulation of evidence.

The Intersection of Privacy and Competition

Olejnik notes that the European Data Protection Supervisor previously identified potential connections between privacy and competition, prompting further analysis. However, he believes EU Competition regulators prioritize competition principles over privacy concerns.

He also points out that a balance between competition and privacy is rarely considered by competition regulators, suggesting it should be viewed as a societal and technological aspect.

Potential for Harmonized Regulations

Given Google’s existing commitments to the U.K.’s CMA, there is a possibility that the EU could adopt a similar framework, potentially streamlining the process if the CMA also approves it.

Olejnik believes a straightforward approach would be to adapt the commitments made to the CMA and present them to the EU, though its success is uncertain.

He concludes, “Consumer harm can arise not only from market conduct but also from issues related to privacy and data protection standards.”