Poland’s competition regulator has accused Alphabet and three Google companies of potentially abusing their dominant market position in negotiations with Polish news publishers, alleging that the technology group withheld information needed to assess how much publishers should be paid for the use of their content. If the allegations are upheld, the companies could face a penalty of up to 10% of turnover.
The Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, known as UOKiK, announced the case on Monday against Alphabet Inc, Google LLC, Google Ireland Limited and Google Poland.
In its 5 October statement, UOKiK said Google had not signed agreements with most Polish press publishers covering the terms and remuneration for using their publications in Google Search, Google News and Google Discover.
- Find more news from Poland on our Homepage .
The regulator’s allegations concern the way those negotiations were conducted rather than the amount Google offered to pay.
UOKiK says Google failed to provide publishers with information and documentation that Polish copyright law requires them to receive when determining remuneration.
According to the regulator, publishers were not given sufficient information about how their articles were being used, what revenues Google generated in connection with those publications, what parameters had been used to calculate proposed payments or the documents needed to verify those calculations.
That, UOKiK alleges, left publishers negotiating with an information disadvantage because Google possessed data they would need to assess whether its offer was reasonable.
Regulator says negotiations became ‘illusory’
UOKiK president Tomasz Chróstny said the absence of those data meant publishers could neither properly evaluate Google’s offer nor formulate their own proposal based on the underlying economics.
“Big tech companies cannot put themselves above the law,” Chróstny said.
He argued that the lack of information had resulted in negotiations becoming effectively illusory and moving towards terms being imposed by the dominant company. Those are allegations being examined in the proceedings, not established findings of wrongdoing.
The four companies named by UOKiK did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment when the case was announced.
UOKiK says the maximum penalty available for abuse of a dominant position can reach 10% of an undertaking’s turnover. The regulator stressed that the responsibility of the individual companies named in the case will be determined during the proceedings.
No penalty has yet been imposed.
Why Polish publishers are entitled to payment
The dispute stems from a major amendment to Poland’s copyright legislation that entered into force on 20 September 2024, implementing the EU’s Digital Single Market copyright directive.
The rules created specific rights for press publishers when their publications are reproduced or made available online by digital service providers.
Under the legislation, a publisher has the right to receive current information and obtain necessary access to a service provider’s documentation where that information is materially relevant to calculating remuneration.
The law says the calculation should take account of factors including revenue generated directly or indirectly from making the publisher’s material available — including advertising revenue — the type of publication involved and the period during which the material was used.
The legislation was introduced after a prolonged dispute between Polish media organisations and large technology platforms over how revenue generated around journalistic material should be shared.
UKE can step in if talks fail
Poland’s system does not give UOKiK the task of setting the price Google should pay publishers.
If negotiations fail to produce an agreement within three months, either side can ask the president of the Office of Electronic Communications, UKE, to begin mediation. The UKE explanation of the procedure says that, in certain circumstances, the regulator can ultimately issue a ruling determining the level of remuneration or the method used to calculate it.
UOKiK stressed that its role in the new case is different: it is investigating whether a company it considers dominant abused that position during negotiations.
The watchdog said it is not deciding whether Google’s proposed payment level itself was appropriate.
That distinction matters because possessing a dominant market position is not itself prohibited under competition law. The alleged infringement would be using that position to impose unfair terms or prevent counterparties from negotiating effectively.
Search, News and Discover under scrutiny
The Polish case covers journalistic material appearing through Google Search, Google News and Google Discover.
UOKiK says publishers depend heavily on Google as an important route for reaching readers while simultaneously lacking access to the same information Google holds about the commercial value and use of their material.
The regulator argues that this imbalance may have prevented the payment mechanism created by the 2024 copyright reform from working as lawmakers intended.
The proceedings are therefore focused on the negotiating process before remuneration is ultimately determined, rather than on whether publishers should receive a particular sum.
Separate EU investigation into Google and AI
The Polish proceedings are distinct from a European Commission investigation opened in December 2025 into Google’s use of online publishers’ and YouTube creators’ material for artificial-intelligence services.
The Commission’s formal antitrust case is examining whether Google may be imposing unfair terms on publishers and content creators or obtaining privileged access to material used for AI development.
UOKiK said the two investigations cover different conduct and are being conducted independently, with the division of responsibilities agreed with the European Commission before the Polish proceedings began.
For Polish publishers, Monday’s action represents the first major competition-law test of whether the negotiating protections added to national copyright law in 2024 are working in practice.
The case now moves through UOKiK’s antitrust procedure, where the authority will have to establish whether the alleged information imbalance amounted to an unlawful abuse of dominance before any fine can be imposed.
