Understanding that history is important because the current debate involves two related but legally distinct questions:<\/p>\n
The European Parliament adopted the Digital Markets Act on 5 July 2022. The Council gave its final approval on 18 July, and the legislation was published in the Official Journal on 12 October.<\/p>\n
The DMA entered into force on 1 November 2022 and became applicable on 2 May 2023<\/a>. Its objective is to make markets involving designated core platform services fairer and more contestable.<\/p>\n The European Commission designated Alphabet as a gatekeeper<\/a> for several core platform services, including Google Search, Google Maps, Google Shopping, Google Play, Chrome, Android, YouTube and its online advertising services.<\/p>\n The designation gave Alphabet six months to bring each designated service into compliance with the relevant DMA obligations.<\/p>\n Following an in-depth merger investigation, the Commission prohibited Booking Holdings\u2019 proposed acquisition of Etraveli Group<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Commission concluded that the transaction would have strengthened Booking\u2019s dominant position in the European Economic Area\u2019s hotel online-travel-agency market.<\/p>\n This was a merger-control decision, not a DMA case. It is nevertheless relevant because it demonstrates that Booking\u2019s market power in European hotel distribution was already attracting regulatory scrutiny before its DMA designation.<\/p>\n Alphabet\u2019s six-month implementation period ended on 7 March 2024<\/a>. From that date, it was required to demonstrate effective compliance with the DMA obligations applying to its designated core platform services.<\/p>\n Google introduced several changes to its European search results, including dedicated formats intended to increase the visibility of comparison services.<\/p>\n Google subsequently argued that these changes benefited large aggregators and comparison platforms while reducing traffic to airlines, hotel operators and other direct suppliers. These figures and conclusions came from Google and should be treated as the company\u2019s account of the effects.<\/p>\n The Commission opened formal non-compliance proceedings<\/a> to assess whether Alphabet continued to favour its own vertical-search services\u2014including Google Shopping and Google Hotels\u2014over similar competing services.<\/p>\n The investigation focused on whether third-party services were receiving fair and non-discriminatory treatment relative to Alphabet\u2019s own services, as required by Article 6(5).<\/p>\n The Commission designated Booking Holdings as a DMA gatekeeper<\/a> in relation to its Booking.com online-intermediation service.<\/p>\n Booking.com is currently the only OTA designated as a gatekeeper under the DMA. Expedia and other large travel intermediaries have not received the same designation.<\/p>\n This distinction matters. Booking\u2019s designation applies to the specified Booking.com service; it should not be interpreted as a legal determination covering every activity of the wider corporate group.<\/p>\n Spain\u2019s National Markets and Competition Commission fined Booking.com \u20ac413.24 million<\/a> for abusing its dominant position in relation to hotels and restricting competition from other OTAs.<\/p>\n This was a Spanish competition-law case and was separate from the European Commission\u2019s DMA enforcement.<\/p>\n The Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that Booking.com\u2019s wide and narrow price-parity clauses<\/a> could not, in principle, be classified as restrictions necessary for the operation of the platform.<\/p>\n The judgment did not itself determine every parity clause to be unlawful in every context. It did, however, reject the argument that such clauses were inherently necessary to protect Booking.com\u2019s business model and strengthened the ability of national courts and competition authorities to scrutinise them.<\/p>\n Booking.com\u2019s six-month compliance period ended on 14 November 2024<\/a>.<\/p>\n Among other requirements, the Commission explained that hotels must be free to offer better prices and conditions through their own websites or other channels. Booking.com must not introduce measures with equivalent effects, such as penalising or delisting hotels because they offer better conditions elsewhere.<\/p>\n Hotels and other business users must also receive continuous access to relevant data generated through their use of Booking.com and be able to transfer that data to alternative platforms.<\/p>\n The Commission began monitoring Booking.com\u2019s implementation through its compliance report, stakeholder workshops and information-gathering powers.<\/p>\n HOTREC subsequently argued that Booking.com remained non-compliant<\/a> and asked the Commission to open formal proceedings. This remains HOTREC\u2019s position; it should not be presented as a Commission finding.<\/p>\n Google tested removing the hotel map and other rich hotel-search features<\/a> for users in Germany, Belgium and Estonia. The experiment replaced those features with a more conventional list of links.<\/p>\n– 6th September 2023: Alphabet is designated as a gatekeeper<\/b><\/h3>\n
– 25th September 2023: the Commission blocks Booking\u2019s acquisition of Etraveli<\/b><\/h3>\n
– 7th March 2024: Google\u2019s compliance deadline takes effect<\/b><\/h3>\n
– 25th March 2024: the Commission opens proceedings against Alphabet<\/b><\/h3>\n
– 13th May 2024: Booking.com is designated as a gatekeeper<\/b><\/h3>\n
– 30th July 2024: Spain fines Booking.com \u20ac413.24 million<\/b><\/h3>\n
– 19th September 2024: the Court of Justice rules on Booking.com\u2019s parity clauses<\/b><\/h3>\n
– 14th November 2024: Booking.com\u2019s DMA obligations become enforceable<\/b><\/h3>\n
November and December 2024: Google tests removing hotel features<\/b><\/h3>\n