A group of independent digital publishers has filed a formal antitrust complaint with the European Commission, alleging that Google’s AI-generated summaries—referred to as “AI Overviews“—are negatively affecting their visibility, web traffic, and advertising income. The complaint argues that these summaries, which appear at the top of search result pages, reduce the likelihood that users will click through to the original content, thereby undermining publishers’ ability to earn revenue from their work.
The filing, submitted by the Independent Publishers Alliance, is backed by advocacy groups including the Movement for an Open Web and Foxglove Legal CIC. It asks the European Commission to introduce immediate regulatory measures to halt what the alliance describes as “irreparable harm” caused by the AI Overviews.
AI Overviews Present New Threat to Publisher Viability
Google introduced AI Overviews as part of its broader integration of artificial intelligence into its core search platform. These summaries, which are powered by large language models, automatically generate responses to user queries and are now being displayed in over 100 countries. In May 2025, Google began placing advertisements within these AI-generated answers, further monetizing the space that was once reserved for traditional search links.
Publishers argue that this shift in search presentation sidelines their content, drawing users away from clicking on source links. The complaint contends that Google’s new format borrows information from publisher content to feed its AI models and then displays it without directing sufficient traffic back to the original creators.
Lack of Opt-Out Leaves Publishers in a Bind
A central grievance in the complaint is that publishers currently have no viable means of opting out of their content being used for AI Overviews without removing their websites entirely from Google Search. According to the filing, this all-or-nothing approach places publishers in a position where they must choose between losing visibility altogether or having their content repurposed without proper attribution or compensation.
This situation, the Alliance argues, puts original content producers at a significant disadvantage. AI Overviews frequently present synthesized answers that draw from the work of journalists, researchers, and writers, but do so in a way that discourages users from visiting the actual publishing site. As a result, these publishers are seeing a sharp decline in traffic, which directly impacts their ability to monetize their platforms through ads, subscriptions, or donations.
Publishers Demand EU Action to Protect Digital Journalism
In response to these developments, the Independent Publishers Alliance is calling on the European Commission to take swift regulatory action. The complaint requests interim measures to limit Google’s deployment of AI Overviews while a thorough investigation takes place. The publishers argue that without immediate intervention, the growing dominance of AI summaries could further erode access to diverse, independent sources of information across Europe.
The European Commission has not issued an official response to the complaint, while the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority has confirmed receipt of the filing and is currently reviewing it.
Google Defends Its AI Strategy and Downplays Complaints
Google has responded to the allegations by defending the role of AI in enhancing search functionality. A company spokesperson stated that AI-powered features like Overviews help users find more detailed answers and explore new types of queries, thereby increasing opportunities for websites to gain visibility.
The company also rejected claims of declining traffic as inaccurate or based on incomplete data. According to Google, fluctuations in website visits can result from a variety of factors, including changes in user behavior, seasonal trends, or updates to its search algorithm.
Google emphasized that it continues to send billions of clicks to websites each day and argued that AI in search, rather than diminishing content discovery, broadens the scope for users to interact with a wider range of information.
Evidence Points to Increasing “Zero-Click” Behavior
Despite Google’s defense, industry data suggests that the rise of AI-generated summaries is leading to a trend known as “zero-click” searches. This term refers to instances where users receive sufficient answers directly from the search page and therefore do not click any external links.
A recent study conducted in mid-2025 showed that nearly 70 percent of all searches ended without a single user click. This marks a significant shift in how people engage with search engines and poses a serious challenge for digital publishers who rely on organic traffic for their business models.
Publishers warn that as Google continues to place AI Overviews in the most prominent search positions, traditional news links and original reporting are being pushed further down the page, effectively reducing their chances of being seen or clicked.
Broader Legal and Regulatory Implications for Tech Platforms
This complaint is one of several global legal challenges Google is currently facing over its AI and search practices. Similar concerns have emerged in the United States, where educational platforms and media companies have raised alarms about AI-generated summaries cannibalizing their content and threatening the sustainability of digital content creation.
The case also comes amid broader scrutiny of major tech platforms in the EU under the newly enforced Digital Markets Act (DMA), which aims to curb anti-competitive behavior and ensure a fair digital marketplace. Regulators across Europe have increasingly expressed concern that the growing dominance of a few technology companies could limit access to independent journalism and reduce content diversity.
Publishers Push for Fair Compensation and Control
Beyond immediate regulatory intervention, publishers are also advocating for long-term changes in how tech companies use and profit from third-party content. They are calling for clearer guidelines on how AI models source information and for the implementation of mechanisms that would allow content creators to either opt out of AI training or receive compensation when their material is used.
The Independent Publishers Alliance argues that without such protections, the future of independent journalism could be at risk, as smaller outlets may not have the resources to compete in a search landscape dominated by AI-generated content.
The group also emphasized the need to preserve access to a broad spectrum of voices in digital media, warning that if only large platforms benefit from AI-driven engagement, consumers could lose access to valuable reporting from smaller, regional, or independent publishers.
AI Integration Likely to Increase Industry Tensions
As artificial intelligence continues to become more deeply embedded in search engines and other online platforms, tensions between tech companies and content providers are expected to intensify. While AI offers the potential to improve user experience and deliver faster answers, it also raises significant questions about ownership, attribution, and fair distribution of digital revenue.
This complaint marks a critical moment in the evolving relationship between search engines and content creators. It forces regulators to confront whether current models adequately balance innovation with fairness and whether new rules are needed to ensure that publishers can survive and thrive in an increasingly AI-driven ecosystem.
The coming months will be crucial as the European Commission decides how to proceed. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for how artificial intelligence is governed in search—and who ultimately benefits from the vast amounts of content being generated and shared online.