欧盟真能分拆谷歌吗？

    欧盟议会的议员们现在想要“分拆谷歌（Google）”。他们声称，这家凭借搜索引擎起家，但同时提供众多其他产品和服务的科技巨头，可以太过轻松地推广自己的产品。不过，知名专家学者们都认为，“分拆谷歌”的情况不会发生，并且表示这是一种只有在极端情况下才可动用的“核选择”，除非企业出现了影响更大的丑闻才有借口这么做。

    今年10月底，欧盟议会呼吁在欧盟国家运营的互联网公司将搜索引擎与其它商业资产进行“松绑”。虽然欧盟没有直接点名，但此举明白无误是针对谷歌的。谷歌是欧洲最有影响力的搜索引擎，估计占据了欧洲市场90%的份额。

    这项不具有约束性的决议并没有任何法律份量，不过在欧盟与谷歌围绕针对后者的反垄断调查进行了四年不成功的谈判后，该决议等于向欧盟委员会发出了最强烈的信号，要求其采取行动。谷歌被控使用了故意隐藏竞争对手的网站与服务等反竞争手段。而欧盟议会最近的行动旨在“防止搜索引擎运营商在营销互联服务时采用任何滥用手段”。

    新当选的欧盟竞争委员会专员玛格丽特•维斯塔格尔于今年11月表示，她“需要一些时间”审核此案，毕竟该案在她的前任杰奎因•阿尔穆尼亚任内并未得到解决，而且她在采取进一步行动之前还将与原告进行磋商。

    那么下一步会发生什么？专家表示，下一步会有几种可能。

    美国司法部前反垄断律师大卫•巴尔托认为：“最有可能也最有希望发生的情况是，继续执行阿尔穆尼亚离职前已经设定好框架的解决方案。”

    巴尔托表示，政治因素与来自谷歌各大竞争对手（包括微软）的压力已经拖慢了此案的进程，“好吸出尽可能多的血”。就在欧盟议会这次投票后不久，一位未透露姓名的欧盟高级官员对路透社（Reuters）表示，欧盟的28个成员国已经成为美国公司的“战场”。巴尔托还指出，在三轮和解谈判后，谷歌为解决反垄断调查付出的努力，已经导致该地区实现了更好的竞争。

    现在的一个问题是，欧盟委员会是否有足够的证据支持其从寻求和解转向违法处罚程序？英国伦敦大学学院国际法学院（University College London’s Institute of Global Law）主任弗洛里安•瓦格纳-冯•帕普对《财富》（Fortune）表示，他希望欧盟“要么行动，要么闭嘴”。反垄断机构要么控告谷歌藐视欧盟反垄断法，要么就干脆放弃此案。否则就是无休止的和解谈判，谷歌的支持者和反对者继续向对方泼“政治脏水”。

    如果裁定谷歌违反了反垄断法，欧盟委员会就可以采取任何它认为必要的措施来终止谷歌的违法行为。那么这是否包括对谷歌进行可能的拆分？理论上存在这种可能性——欧盟委员会的反垄断部门有权要求一家在该地区经营的企业进行重组。不过帕普愿意赌这种情况不会发生。他表示：“欧盟委员会到目前为止，还从来没有开出过重组药方”。

    Europe’s elected elite want to break up Google. The technology giant, known for its web search engine but offering many other products and services, can too easily promote its own wares, they say. Yet leading experts and academics say it’s not going to happen, calling it a nuclear option that would have made more sense in larger, prior corporate scandals.

    The European Parliament in late October called on Internet companies operating in the region to “unbundle” its search engines from its other commercial properties. Although no companies were named, the motion was aimed squarely at Google GOOG -2.24% , the leading search engine by a long shot in Europe with an estimated 90 percent market share.

    The non-binding resolution had no legal weight, but sent the strongest signal yet to the European Commission to take action after almost four-years worth of unsuccessful negotiations to settle an ongoing antitrust probe into the company’s business practices. The company has been accused of anti-competitiveness including claims it deliberate buried search results of rival sites and services. The recent motion sought to “prevent any abuse in the marketing of interlinked services by operators of search engines.”

    Newly-elected EU competition commissioner MargretheVestagersaid in November that she would “need some time” to review the case, which has been kept open by her predecessor JoaquínAlmunia, and talk to complainants before moving forward.

    So now what? There are several paths forward, experts say.

    “What’s most likely to happen, and what will hopefully happen, is a continuation of the resolution for which Almunia set the framework before he left office,” says David Balto, a former U.S. Justice Department antitrust lawyer.

    Politics and pressure behind the scenes from Google’s competitors—including Microsoft MSFT -0.86% —have dragged the case out “to draw as much blood as possible,” Balto argues. Shortly after the parliament’s vote, one unnamed senior EU official told Reuters that the 28-member state bloc had been used as a “battleground” by American companies. After three rounds of settlement negotiations, Balto says Google’s efforts to address the matter have resulted in better competition in the region.

    One question is whether the Commission has enough evidence to support moving from seeking a settlement to conducting an infringement procedure. Florian Wagner-von Papp, director of the University College London’s Institute of Global Law, tells Fortune that he wishes the EC would “put up or shut up.” Antitrust officials should either charge the search giant with flouting European antitrust law, he says, or drop the case altogether. The alternative? More settlement negotiations and “political mud-slinging” by Google’s supporters and opponents.

    By charging Google with antitrust offenses, the Commission can take any measures it deems necessary to end that infringement. Could that really include a break-up of Google? In theory, yes—the European Commission’s antitrust division has the right to force a company operating in the region to restructure. But Wagner-von Papp is willing to make a big bet that it won’t happen. “The Commission has to date never imposed a structural remedy in an infringement decision,” he says.