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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 413 points 6 months ago* (15 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?

  • source
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 115 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago (2 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 59 points 6 months 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 6 months 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 6 months ago

    Two economists are walking down the street and pass by a pile of dog shit. One of them (a sadist) turns to the other and says "I'll pay you $1000 if you eat that dog shit".

    The other performs an internal utility calculation and eats the dog shit.

    Continuing their walk, the second economist sees another pile of dog shit and makes the same offer to the first. The first economist also agrees, and eats the dog shit. They walk on.

    After a while the second economist says to the first "I can't help thinking we're worse off than when we started this walk. We both have the same amount of money we started with, but we both had to eat shit."

    The first economist replies "Worse off?! We've just engaged in 2000 dollars worth of trade!".

    Look, by certain ways of calculating GDP growth and trade, it's probably true that if the money isn't being spent on software licenses and so on, it means there's less economic activity going on.

    The whole point of open source / free software is that you're not locked into someone's proprietary software ecosystem. You don't have to continue paying license fees. So, if the governments simply stop paying for software licenses, it's probably true that their GDP will technically shrink. But, that assumes the money won't be spent on something more useful.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago

    No i think the comment is less direct than that.

    For much of government, the underlying objective is to contribute to GDP. For example, funding healthcare means a healthier population who can be more productive.

    So by saying "this policy won't contribute to GDP" its a very general way to say this is not what's best for your population.

    At least I think thats what theyre saying.

    As an aside, savings dont directly improve GDP, by definition.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    When corporations or conservatives talk about "the economy", simply replace it with "rich people's bank accounts" and it makes sense again.
    They are trying to gaslight you into still believing in the trickle-down-theory, against decades of evidence.
    And all mainstream media as well as centrist parties (including the US Democrats) join in.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    They are suggesting that going to open source solutions won't result in new industry in their countries (i.e. that Google won't be opening offices and data centers and such there).

    It's a pretty bogus statement anyways, but it's not COMPLETELY senseless.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    I think he's arguing that not using the most advanced technologies (eg. what Google and Microsoft offer) would be detrimental to worker productivity in the EU.

    Of course, in reality, if all those countries start investing in FOSS, they could easily replace the Office suit, SharePoint, the Power platform, etc. I know several programmers who'd gladly devote their time to FOSS full-time if they could. I've even met one who simply refuses to work to create anything proprietary.

  • source
  • parent