this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2026
284 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

81161 readers
4697 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Google has criticized the European Union’s intentions to achieve digital sovereignty through open-source software. The company warned that Brussels’ policies aimed at reducing dependence on American tech companies could harm competitiveness. According to Google, the idea of replacing current tools with open-source programs would not contribute to economic growth.

Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs and chief legal officer, warned of a competitive paradox that Europe is facing. According to the Financial Times, he said that creating regulatory barriers would be harmful in a context of rapid technological advancement. His remarks came just days after the European Commission concluded a public consultation assessing the transition to open-source software.

Google’s chief legal officer clarified that he is not opposed to digital sovereignty, but recommended making use of the “best technologies in the world.” Walker suggested that American companies could collaborate with European firms to implement measures ensuring data protection. Local management or servers located in Europe to store information are among the options.

The EU is preparing a technological sovereignty package aimed at eliminating dependence on third-party software, such as Google’s. After reviewing proposals, it concluded that reliance on external suppliers for critical infrastructure entails economic risks and creates vulnerabilities. The strategy focuses not only on regulation but also on adopting open-source software to achieve digital sovereignty.

According to Google, this change would represent a problem for users. Walker argues that the market moves faster than legislation and warns that regulatory friction will only leave European consumers and businesses behind in what he calls “the most competitive technological transition we have ever seen.” As it did with the DMA and other laws, Google is playing on fear. Kent Walker suggested that this initiative would stifle innovation and deny people access to the “best digital tools.”

The promotion of open-source software aims to break dependence on foreign suppliers, especially during a period of instability caused by the Trump administration. The European Union has highlighted the risks of continuing under this system and proposes that public institutions should have full control over their own technology.

According to a study on the impact of open-source software, the European Commission found that it contributes between €65 billion and €95 billion annually to the European Union’s GDP. The executive body estimates that a 10% increase in contributions to open-source software would generate an additional €100 billion in growth for the bloc’s economy.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 minutes ago

Google criticizes

Fuck you and shut the fuck up. Google has zero right to say anything, let alone criticize anything.

Do no evil, remember? I remember.

Fuck you

[–] HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 2 points 12 minutes ago
  1. Shift over to open source.
  2. Invest 25--50% of what you currently pay for proprietary software into helping maintain and enhance open source software.
  3. Enjoy the economic benefits well maintained free software brings to every aspect of your digital infrastructure at no extra cost.
[–] anguo@piefed.ca 2 points 30 minutes ago

I actually giggled at this.

[–] artyom@piefed.social 1 points 38 minutes ago

According to the Financial Times

Original article paywalled. Shame because I really wanted to hear how they were going to explain:

The company warned that Brussels’ policies aimed at reducing dependence on American tech companies could harm competitiveness

[–] Steve@communick.news 178 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (9 children)

According to Google, the idea of replacing current tools with open-source programs would not contribute to economic growth.

Is Google seriously arguing that the money these nations save can't be added to their GDPs?
That's what it sounds like. Or am I confused?

[–] TheLastOfHisName@piefed.social 73 points 3 hours ago

Google meant THEIR economic growth.

[–] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 50 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

To an enormous extent are todays data centers, cloud providers, and all the techology the whole world use today based on open source. Without linux, curl, ffmpeg, and so on nothing in todays high tech society would work. Google, as it is today, would not exist if it was for all the open source they leech of.

[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 14 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Well Google contributes a lot to open source, but I get your point.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 1 points 7 minutes ago

Chrome comes from Safari that comes from KHTML, the original KDE web browser. No open source means no Chrome.

[–] Korkki@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 hours ago

They mostly do that because they want control and maybe slowly reach their tentacles into projects. Like Chromium and Android are in theory open source, but in practice both are locked down by google and used for their business and mass data harvesting and advertising empire.

[–] inari@piefed.zip 88 points 4 hours ago

Don't worry, Google is trying to confuse you

[–] rezad@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

they meant google's economic growth.

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

They are saying FOSS isnt companies, google's value is tied to GDP in some EU countries. If they see less growth so does the GDP.

Yanks are whores who only think of money and kids.

[–] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Perhaps they understand economic growth the same way the orange rapist understands tariffs?

[–] BananaTrifleViolin@piefed.world 10 points 3 hours ago

Nah that's it. Their logic is seemingly if you don't give the money to Google it's not contributing to economic growth.

[–] bobs_monkey@lemmy.zip 13 points 3 hours ago

Nah, I think they're saying that their corporate offerings and jobs in a given country would not contribute to GDP, while failing to address that developers and engineers would still be necessary to implement these open source applications, though Google won't get to siphon money out of those economies. It's purposely convoluted, basically Google throwing a temper tantrum.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] timestatic@feddit.org 5 points 1 hour ago

The government should just pay some money to maintainers instead of giving it to corpos. That way everyone wins, instead of just google because the code is in the hand of the public. Also google, please just like, politely, fuck off. We know you guys want in on this, even if we need an out. Everyone knows your worries aren't for public interest but for your own pockets. FOSS actually supports a much more competitive landscape by not locking in users and allowing people to build on each others ideas instead of creating monopolies.

[–] Decq@lemmy.world 46 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

When companies like Google, Microsoft, etc. are starting to squirm and whimper. You know you are on the right path. So I take this as a sign that the EU is heading in the right direction.

[–] CardboardVictim@piefed.social 7 points 1 hour ago

That's my take as well

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 113 points 4 hours ago (3 children)

The company warned that Brussels’ policies aimed at reducing dependence on American tech companies could harm competitiveness.

Just what I'd expect a monopoly to say.

Fuck you. Alphabet.

[–] cideyav138@lemmy.ml 11 points 2 hours ago

Increased competition from open source alternatives harms competitiveness? By forcing them to compete and maybe actually innovate?

[–] timestatic@feddit.org 4 points 1 hour ago

"well yes you actually need to stay dependent on us to be competitive" -fucking ridiculous

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 hours ago

They mean it would harm their competitiveness.

As in, "We'd be less competitive if you switch to a competitor" (in this case FOSS).

[–] skvlp@lemmy.wtf 20 points 3 hours ago

Walker suggested that American companies could collaborate with European firms to implement measures ensuring data protection. Local management or servers located in Europe to store information are among the options.

As long as they’re a US company US law can force them to hand over data. No matter where the servers are located.

[–] Lembot_0006@programming.dev 60 points 4 hours ago (26 children)

Of course Google hates open-source. They can't compete with it. Same shit with Microsoft: people are just afraid of trying Linux, but those who do, rarely look back at Windows.

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 7 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (3 children)

I never worked for Google, so I can't say for sure, but I have this weird suspicion that they use a shitload of open source software, and I'm not just talking about their Android OS or Chromebooks, but for their most core businesses.

It wouldn't be odd to think that Google might not exist except for their being able to use the open-source software that people had made before they founded their company.

The alternative is that they were complete idiots who paid for all sorts of retail software.

Of course Google hates open-source. They can’t compete with it.

Again, it's just my supposition, but I'd bet that they can't compete without it, either.

For any major tech company, apart from ones that are absolutely dedicated to proprietary software starting from firmware up through the OS and on to applications, like Microsoft and Apple, it's going to be deeply hypocritical to hate open-source.

[–] bufalo1973@piefed.social 1 points 3 minutes ago

It's the "pull the ladder" mentality.

[–] Lembot_0006@programming.dev 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

They can’t compete with it.

I meant "They can’t compete against it." Interlanguage translation nuances :)

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 4 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

You were using the phrase correctly. "They can't compete with it," is the standard way of saying what you intended to say.

I was playing off of the normal meaning of your statement to make a turn of phrase. In other words, I am intentionally using weird phrasing, and placing it next to your normal phrasing for humor and impact.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I have this weird suspicion that they use a shitload of open source software, and I’m not just talking about their Android OS or Chromebooks, but for their most core businesses.

"Open source for me, but not for thee."

That's also why they bait-and-switched us with AOSP.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] Zedstrian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 hours ago

Walker suggested that American companies could collaborate with European firms to implement measures ensuring data protection.

Simultaneously, those same companies are actively lobbying the EU to dismantle those protections.

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 9 points 2 hours ago

Dear Google: we wouldn't have to do this if you weren't such a shit company.

Oh, you weren't aware that you're a shit company? You legitimately believe you're a positive force for the world? Well that's your own damn fault.

[–] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 27 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not surprised that they are against it but very surprised that they so blatantly expose their reasoning. If you don't buy my product, it's not good for me, therefore it is not a good idea 🤷

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 hours ago

I think all these tech billionaires have lost the capacity to think like reasoning adults. If they ever had it to begin with...

Their whole worldview is "What's best for me?" They have so much power, they think anything that's not good for them should be scorned by everyone.

[–] willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 hours ago

The irony is that Google uses FOSS software in a huge way since its founding.

Free and Open Source Software for me, but not for thee, Europe.

Fuck Google's hypocrisy. And fuck Google/Alphabet.

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

I'm more surprised this isn't Microsoft lol

[–] FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website 19 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

This is sign that Google is worried that a market of 500 million people could decide to move away from the US tech giants. Very worried, judging by this flimsy fear-driven argument. Good.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 hours ago

I hope Europe plays hard ball to over leverage the tech companies, then rips the rug out from under them. Tech companies will amplify even the smallest portions of American frustration, projecting it as a larger problem for the public than it actually is… but I for one will support Europe in playing dirty. Glad, even.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BetaBlake@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

"why haven't you thought of our bottom line?!?"

load more comments
view more: next ›