The General Superintendence of the Administrative Council for Economic Defense (SG/Cade) denied, on Tuesday (11th), a request made by Google. This request aimed to present testimonial evidence within an investigation that examines the use of journalistic material by the search platform without due compensation to media outlets.
The decision occurred within the context of a process examining the interaction between Google and press companies. This case gained new dimensions this year with the incorporation of generative artificial intelligence (AI) functionalities during the inquiry.
In a technical note, the general superintendent of Cade, Felipe Roquete, clarified that Google should have specified in its defense the complete qualification of up to three witnesses who would be heard at the agency's facilities. Since the company failed to indicate these witnesses, the request for hearings was rendered unfeasible.
On the other hand, Cade accepted Google's request to provide documentary evidence, technical reports, economic analyses, and accounting and expert appraisals. The administrative inquiry that originated this issue was initiated in 2019, and Cade noted that technological advancements since then required integration into the analysis.
Expansion of the investigation to generative AI
In April 2026, the agency's tribunal decided to deepen the investigation, including generative AI in the scope of the inquiry. This technology is used to generate new content in various formats, such as audio, video, and text. Initially, the focus was on so-called snippets, which are summarized excerpts displayed in Google search results, along with links to the original publications.
However, in April, the tribunal determined that the General Superintendence should begin an administrative process to analyze in detail the display of AI-created answers to user queries, a feature called AI Overviews. This change broadened the scope of the investigation to cover a technology capable of presenting users with consolidated information from multiple sources, including content produced by news outlets.
During the procedural process, Google also requested the dismissal of the investigation. The company argued that its services offer 'significant benefits to users and press outlets.' Furthermore, the company contended that the evidence collected over more than five years does not demonstrate the occurrence of exclusionary conduct, economic dependence, lock-in effect, exploitation, or any other form of competitive harm.
Nevertheless, the investigation continues, now also covering the impacts of generative AI on the relationship established between search platforms and journalistic companies. Olhar Digital contacted Google's press office to await an official statement.
