FairSearch ‘acting alone in Google fight’

• Coalition says decisions are based on consensus and it is not a front for Naspers and Oracle

FairSearch, the Naspers-backed group taking aim at Google’s search practices in Europe, said on Tuesday that it was not a front for Naspers or US technology company Oracle, and that its decisions were based on the consensus of all its members.

On Sunday, Politico reported that Naspers and Oracle had full legal control over the nonprofit organisation, suggesting that their fight against Google was for their own gain and not necessarily for the benefit of other FairSearch members.

FairSearch is battling what it deems to be uncompetitive practices by Google’s search business and the firm’s Android mobile operating system.

Politico said the fact that the FairSearch board consisted solely of Naspers and Oracle representatives raised concerns that competition investigations could be “taken hostage by warring corporate interests”.

FairSearch said on Tuesday that it was “a group of companies that operates through a consensus of our members, who all make contributions”.

The group, which has about nine core member firms and represents others, said it “stands behind both of our filings for the purposes for which they were intended”. It had also remained transparent in accordance with

EU rules. In 2017, the European Commission ruled in favour of FairSearch’s search complaint, saying that Google was promoting its online shopping results over those of its competitors. Google was fined about $3bn, but it is contesting the ruling.

FairSearch brought a similar case against Google’s Android operating system in 2013. The case is still in progress.

David Tudor, Naspers’s general counsel and a director of FairSearch along with Oracle’s Karl Cox, said Naspers joined FairSearch in 2012 via Polish online shopping group Allegro, which it later sold.

Tudor was general counsel of Allegro in central and eastern Europe at the time.

He decided then that the company should join FairSearch because Allegro and other internet companies were “encountering difficulties with the way Google was treating some of the search results”.

“The challenge you have is when someone has such an incredibly strong position in search, which is so important to access services, they can use that in order to [give preference to] their own services.”

Tudor said that Naspers and Oracle were not mandated to act on behalf of FairSearch and that board appointments had been voluntary.

“In no sense can Oracle or Naspers dictate to the wider group what FairSearch will do, that’s not the way the coalition is structured. It’s entirely consensus driven,” he said.

FairSearch provided a means for Google’s smaller rivals to pool resources and act together.

“It’s been easier to be there [as a complainant] as part of the coalition of people, all of whom have been affected by a particular behaviour.”

IN NO SENSE CAN ORACLE OR NASPERS DICTATE TO THE WIDER GROUP WHAT FAIRSEARCH WILL DO