Turkey’s competition authority has opened a formal antitrust investigation into Google’s AI Overviews and AI Mode, and has already imposed interim measures requiring fair terms for news publishers. The probe, announced on November 2, examines whether the AI search features abuse a dominant position by cutting publishers’ traffic and visibility while using their content on terms the authority calls discriminatory and exploitative. Google has not publicly responded to the announcement.
What the probe covers
The investigation was launched under Article 41 of Turkey’s Law on the Protection of Competition, and will test whether Google violated Article 6, which bans abuse of a dominant position. It names Alphabet and four Google units, including Google Ireland and Google’s Turkish advertising arm, treated as a single economic unit.
The case grew out of a preliminary inquiry the Competition Board opened on August 27, which examined four questions. They covered how AI answers change the way people find information, whether publisher contracts contain unfair terms, whether the features exclude rivals, and whether Google treats publishers differently when selecting or licensing content.
The interim measures
The Board decided the interim measures at its October 8 meeting, finding a strong suspicion of discriminatory and exploitative conduct toward news publishers. Under the measures, Google must offer news publishers non-discriminatory terms that reflect the economic value of their content in AI Overviews and AI Mode.
Publishers must also be able to decide how their content is used in the two features without any effect on their visibility or indexing in Google’s other services. That separation matters because publishers otherwise face a choice between feeding AI answers and keeping their ordinary search presence.
The measures cover news publishers only, even though the preliminary inquiry also asked about other content creators and competing AI assistants. The announcement sets no compliance deadline, names no fine and puts no monetary figure on the value of the content, leaving the commercial approach to Google.
What is still unknown
Google had not publicly responded by late morning Central European Time on November 2, MACCUS reported after reading the authority’s announcement in full. The authority’s own news portal described the decision as a fair-share measure and mentioned remuneration, but the official announcement itself does not say Google must pay.
How economic value will be assessed is also unclear, as is whether Google’s existing Search generative AI setting already satisfies the independence requirement. That setting, available worldwide since August 31, removes a site from AI Overviews and AI Mode, but Google says it is not a ranking signal and covers no payment or licensing.
Our read: the first ruling that prices the answer, not just the link
Turkey’s move is the first to turn the publisher-versus-AI-search argument into an interim obligation rather than a promise of future rules. Brussels is still investigating, London has mandated opt-out tools, and Paris is weighing a referral, but Ankara has already told Google what its terms must achieve while the case runs.
The weakness is enforcement by ambiguity. Without a deadline, a fine or a method for valuing content, the measures depend on Google’s good faith and on the reasoned decision still to come. Publishers gain leverage in negotiations, but they do not yet gain a payment, a rate card or a timetable.
The strongest part of the order may prove to be the independence rule. If publishers can withhold content from AI answers without losing ordinary search visibility, the old bargain, in which search traffic was the price of being summarized, breaks. That is the change other regulators have pursued but not yet imposed in this form.
Why It Matters
For publishers, the case tests whether AI answers will carry a price at all. AI Overviews now appear on more than 80 percent of searches, so a ruling that terms must reflect economic value could reshape how every search market pays for the content its answers summarize.
The market has already priced the traffic risk. Reddit’s stock crash after its chief confirmed declining Google search traffic showed investors treating lost referrals as a real cost, and Turkish publishers are now asking a regulator to treat that cost as something Google must offset.
For Google, the risk is precedent spreading faster than the case itself. A Turkish interim measure does not bind Brussels or London, but it gives publishers in those cases a working example of terms that go beyond an opt-out, and it raises the cost of arguing that payment questions can wait.
Background
Google introduced AI Overviews and AI Mode in Turkey in February 2026, and the European Commission opened its own formal investigation into the same features in December 2025. Google’s shared AI training control arrived separately in October, but it governs model training, not payment for answers in search.
Source: Daily Sabah report, PYMNTS report
0 Comments