The competition authorities and the digital sector

In the last five years, the National Commission for Markets and Competition (CNMC) has resolved thirteen sanctioning proceedings initiated against companies in the digital sector, of which ten concluded in dismissal, two in a fine, and one was resolved by conventional termination. This last one is addressed in this column.

On December 17, 2025, the CNMC resolved by conventional termination the sanctioning proceeding opened against Google for possible restrictive practices of competition in the negotiation and formalization of its agreements with Spanish press publishers and news agencies following a complaint from the Spanish Center for Reprographic Rights (CEDRO) in 2021. Google prevented the CNMC from declaring the existence of an infringement by presenting a series of binding commitments accepted by the CNMC.

In its investigation, the CNMC considered that Google could have abused its dominant position by imposing unfair commercial or service conditions on press publishers, in addition to incurring in possible unfair competition practices by exploiting the economic dependence of Spanish publishers.

Specifically, in this file the Spanish authority focused on Google's practices relating to its agreements with agencies and publishers for the assignment of related rights (intellectual property rights that allow publishers to control the online use of their press publications by intermediation platforms). Through these agreements, Google obtains the assignment of these rights to be able to display journalistic content in its services (for example, on the results page of its search engine).

With this investigation, the CNMC reminds that companies in the digital sector are in the spotlight of compliance with competition law rules. The analyzed conventional termination resolution of the CNMC adds to other proceedings of that body directed against technology companies (Booking.com, in 2024, and Amazon / Apple Brandgating, in 2023). Likewise, the European Commission initiated last December a formal investigation to study whether Google's artificial intelligence model violates European competition law rules.

In this matter we find ourselves with the interesting practice of conventional termination, a legal mechanism that allows the closure of sanctioning files without a formal declaration of infringement, in exchange for undertaking certain binding commitments that come to quickly and effectively solve the detected competition problems.

In the case at hand, Google presented fourteen commitments related to its intellectual property rights assignment agreements for press publications with agencies and publishers. According to the CNMC, these commitments address competition concerns in relation to transparency in negotiation, the remuneration offered by Google, and the content of the agreements.

Some of these commitments could have a significant impact on Google's business model, particularly those related to remuneration and transparency in its calculation. Additionally, the company must disclose to publishers certain strategic data about its online advertising business that it had previously protected, such as, for example, its advertising revenue or the share of publication impressions. The proposed commitments will have an initial duration of five years and, if the CNMC deems it necessary, may be extended for another five years.

A sanctioning procedure that ends with the declaration of a prohibited practice in competition matters can seriously affect the sanctioned company: the imposition of fines on the entity and its directors, the possible extension of liability to the parent company, the prohibition from contracting with public administrations, without forgetting future private damage claims, are consequences that any company would want to avoid, especially larger ones. Conventional termination is an adequate mechanism for this.

Ultimately, this case, as we said, the only sanctioning file in the digital sector resolved by conventional termination in the last five years by the CNMC, sets a relevant precedent on how authorities balance the need to guarantee a fair competitive process and free with instruments that incentivize collaboration from companies.