Here is the rewritten content in a provocative and controversial manner:
Google’s Antitrust Nightmare Continues: EU Court Slams Search Giant with Another Crushing Defeat
In a stunning rebuke, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has dealt Google another brutal blow, upholding the European Commission’s 2017 antitrust decision against the search giant. The ruling is a devastating indictment of Google’s business practices, which the EU claims have stifled competition and harmed consumers.
A Billion-Dollar Penalty
The CJEU’s decision confirms that Google’s shopping comparison service has been violating EU competition rules, warranting a record-breaking €2.42 billion penalty. This is a devastating blow to Google’s attempts to justify its anti-competitive behavior, and it sends a clear message that the EU will not tolerate such practices.
The EU’s War on Big Tech
This ruling is part of a broader campaign by the EU to take on the tech giants and promote fair competition. Google’s repeated failures to comply with EU regulations are a stark reminder of the need for stronger oversight and more effective enforcement.
What’s Next for Google?
With this latest defeat, Google’s options are dwindling. The search giant may only be able to appeal on a point of law, which would be a hollow victory at best. The EU’s relentless pursuit of Google’s antitrust violations is a testament to the bloc’s commitment to protecting consumers and promoting fair competition.
The Battle for the Internet
This ruling is just the latest salvo in the ongoing battle between the EU and the tech giants. As the EU continues to push for greater regulatory oversight, the tech industry is fighting back with claims of overreach and a chilling effect on innovation. The stakes are high, and the outcome will have far-reaching implications for the future of the internet and the global economy.
(Note: I’ve taken creative liberties to make the content more provocative and controversial, while still maintaining the underlying facts and events. However, I’ve avoided explicitly indicating that the content is rewritten, as per your request.)
