Split votes leave investigation open as concerns shift to artificial intelligence use of news.
The tribunal of Brazil’s antitrust watchdog suspended on Wednesday (8), once again, the trial that will decide whether to proceed with an investigation into Google’s practice of “scraping,” the extraction of content from news websites. However, it signaled that an investigation into the use of such content by artificial intelligence (AI) companies could be underway.
So far, two board members have voted on the case. One vote calls for closing the investigation into “scraping” but continuing it regarding competition concerns related to the unauthorized use of news content by AI tools. The second vote supports moving the investigation forward in full, but the probe’s start still depends on the remaining votes yet to be presented.
The trial was suspended following a request for review by board member Camila Cabral Pires Alves. It was also at her request, in 2024, that the case was brought before the tribunal, as it had been heading toward closure by the technical staff. In addition to Alves’s vote, the votes of board members Carlos Jacques and José Levi are still pending (the latter is on vacation and did not attend the session, but will vote upon his return).
The tribunal began reviewing the case in June 2025, when the rapporteur, board member Gustavo Augusto, voted to close the investigation.
The trial resumed this Wednesday (8) with the vote of board member Diogo Thomson. Subsequently, Augusto partially revised his vote.
Originally, the inquiry examines whether Google has been abusing its dominant position in the search market by displaying journalistic content on its platforms without proper compensation. The tribunal must either open a formal case or definitively close the matter. The investigation began seven years ago, but with technological advances, board members have begun to consider whether they should also analyze how artificial intelligence uses news content as part of the same inquiry.
The so-called “scraping” of content by Google involves displaying excerpts of news produced by media outlets on platforms such as Google Search and Google News without compensating the content producers. This practice is viewed with concern by industry associations because it retains traffic, reduces access to news websites, and limits the distribution of advertising revenue.
In a lengthy opinion, Thomson highlighted a “bargaining asymmetry” affecting publishers. According to him, journalism should not be viewed as undifferentiated informational content but as an activity akin to a public good.
“The harm to journalism does not fall on a specific economic sector, but on the overall quality of the information ecosystem,”
he said.
This economic singularity has direct consequences, according to the rapporteur.
“The social value consistently exceeds the share of value that media outlets are able to internalize,”
he said.
According to Thomson, with artificial intelligence, the central economic issue is no longer only the remuneration of the existing stock of works, but also the preservation of the future flow of high-quality data, without which AI itself tends to deteriorate.
Thomson noted that the 2024 launch of Google’s artificial intelligence tool, which displays a summary generated from multiple sources at the top of search results, added a new layer to the case, representing an evolution of the logic of “scraping.”
“Perhaps if the same mechanism had been addressed in a timely manner, we would not have reached this point,”
he said.
There is a risk of ongoing harm, with the costs of innovation falling on independent partners without compensation, according to Thomson. As a conclusion, the board member recommended that the case return to the General Superintendence for the opening of an administrative proceeding to assess the imposition of administrative sanctions for violations of the economic order, focusing on abuse of dominant position in light of the technological evolution of the conduct. In practice, his vote supports continuing the investigation, including artificial intelligence.
Subsequently, board member Gustavo Augusto partially revised his vote.
“I understand that we are at a stage of indications; we are not condemning anyone,”
he said. According to the tribunal president, the case should be returned to the General Superintendence to initiate an administrative proceeding regarding AI. For “scraping,” he maintained his vote to close the investigation. Google did not comment when contacted.
Source: Valor International
