The Italian Multiply (Mutuionline) asks for compensation of 3 billion to Google: « Sleale competition from the comparator Trovapreszzi »

Multiply asks for over three billion compensation in Google for the damage caused to its online product comparator found by the unfair competition of the search engine. In recent days, the Italian group, in the past known as Mutuionline, has presented an act of summons against Google and its Alphabet home-Madre at the Milan court.

The fine of the EU Commission

The 7Pixel advanced compensation application, controlled by Multiply, originates from the 2.4 billion anti -retro fine fine eight years ago by the EU Commission in Google. At that venue Brussels has established that since 2008 and until the end of 2017, the Big Tech USA has abused its dominant position in the Internet search to take advantage of its comparator Google Shopping compared to the sites of others. Google has, in particular, inserted at the top of the search results boxes of the products that referred to Google Shopping, relegating instead the links of competitors in lower positions.

Google’s dominance on the web

Google manages over 90% of Internet research in Italy (and similar shares in other EU countries) And the order with which the results offers is decisive for consumer choices. The first link that appears at the top of the page attracts about a third of the clicks, the fifth only 6% and less than 1% of users arrives beyond the twelfth position. According to the EU Commission, therefore, the privilege granted by Google in the results to its comparator allowed Google Shopping to quickly climb the European market and, symmetrically, has prevented local rivals as finding from growing.

Google Shopping growth

The number of clicks is in fact the meter of the success of a comparator: the more it gets it, the greater the number of companies willing to pay to show their products in this web showcase, the greater the sum paid. The EU Commission estimated that from the beginning of the abuse in 2008 to 2017 web traffic on Google Shopping has grown 45 times in the United Kingdom, 35 times in Germany, 17 in Spain and 14 in Italy. An increase due not only to the boom of e-commerce, but also to the hijacking of users from rival sites which, until that moment leader in domestic markets, after the introduction of Google Shopping boxes have undergone a drop in clicks.

The judgments of the EU Courts

Google contested the decision of European antitrust, but The 2.4 billion penalty and the reconstruction of the underlying facts were confirmed first by the EU Court in 2021 and then in September 2024 by the EU Court of Justice definitively. On this basis Multiply has decided to start against Big G another cause after that intended in 2019 without success due to the simultaneous slope of European proceedings. Compared to then, however, the compensation request has risen, from 8-900 million to around 3 billion euros.

The calculation of the damage for Multiply

The lawyers of Multiply, the Pedersoligattai firm, arrive at the figure taking into account two types of damage. On the one hand, they calculate the revenues and profits lost between 2011 and 2017 from Trovaprezzi – and Shoppydooo, another 7Pixel comparator closed in 2021 – due to the privilege granted to Google Shopping. On the other hand, they estimate how 7pixel and, therefore, Multiply could have collected if Google had not altered the market structure with its dominant abuse. In other words, what weight would have on the Italian market today find if Google had not abused its dominant position? The Court of Milan will answer this question and its decision could also establish an important precedent for other European countries.

Big G’s reply

Google’s reply was not long in coming. «The changes made in 2017 following the decision of the European Commission are working as expected, so much so that The number of shopping comparators in Europe that use our shopping solutions has multiplied by only 7 to over 1,550, without any intervention by the Commission« Said a Google spokesman. « We are strongly disagreed with these exorbitant requests for compensation for private damage, which ignore the success and growth of this sector ».