Response to the CMA Consultation on Proposed Conduct Requirements for Google's General Search and Search Advertising Services

Abstract

The  SCiDA team broadly support the CMA's approach across all four conduct requirements while identifying several areas where clarification or strengthening would enhance effectiveness. On the Publisher Conduct Requirement, we consider the CMA's identification of compelled consent as a central problem to be well-founded, but note that the opt-out model's workability was questioned at the stakeholder roundtable, with several participants advocating for structural separation of the search crawler and AI crawler. On the Fair Ranking Conduct Requirement, we support the proposed scope, including its extension to AI Overviews and AI Mode, while noting that definitional ambiguities regarding the distinction between fair ranking and self-preferencing require clarification. On the User Choice Conduct Requirement, we welcome the innovative test-drive functionality but raise concerns about the delegation of critical implementation decisions to Google, particularly regarding the number of providers to be displayed on the choice screen. On the Data Portability Conduct Requirement, we agree that formalising Google's voluntary provision of its DMA-compliant data portability API is both necessary and proportionate, while recommending greater clarity on the scope of specified data and the interaction with data protection obligations.

Keywords: DMCCA, Digital Markets, Google Search, AI Overviews, Choice Screen, Portability, Fair Ranking