French authorities dismissed Qwant’s antitrust complaint against Microsoft on November 27, 2025, due to insufficient evidence. The Autorité de la Concurrence found no proof of Microsoft’s dominant position in search syndication or viable alternatives for Qwant. This ruling avoids a formal investigation for now.
-
Qwant accused Microsoft of exclusivity in search and advertising tools, limiting independent development.
-
The regulator rejected temporary injunctions, citing lack of convincing evidence from Qwant.
-
In June 2025, Qwant launched a new syndication service with a partner, showing available alternatives according to regulators.
French regulators dismiss Qwant’s antitrust case against Microsoft for lack of evidence on dominance. Explore implications for tech competition and search engines. Stay informed on Big Tech scrutiny—read more now.
What Led to the Dismissal of Qwant’s Antitrust Complaint Against Microsoft?
The dismissal of Qwant’s antitrust complaint against Microsoft by French authorities stems from the search engine’s failure to provide sufficient evidence supporting its claims of abusive practices. On November 27, 2025, the Autorité de la Concurrence announced the decision, noting that Qwant could not demonstrate Microsoft’s dominant position in the relevant market for search syndication. This outcome highlights the challenges smaller players face in challenging tech giants without robust proof.
How Did Qwant Accuse Microsoft of Market Abuse?
Qwant, a privacy-focused French search engine, filed the complaint alleging that Microsoft imposed exclusivity restrictions through its Bing search and advertising tools. According to Qwant, these “exclusive supply arrangements” and “tying” practices forced the company to bundle services, hindering the development of its own search algorithms and AI capabilities. The regulator’s detailed review, as outlined in its official statement, examined these claims but found them lacking in evidentiary support.
Supporting data from the Autorité indicates that Qwant did not adequately prove economic dependence or barriers to accessing advertising revenues. For instance, the authority pointed out that Qwant had viable alternatives, including a partnership announced in June 2025 with another search provider to create an independent syndication service using proprietary technology. This collaboration demonstrates that options exist beyond Microsoft’s ecosystem, undermining Qwant’s arguments about blocked growth. Experts in competition law, such as those from the European University Institute, have noted in past analyses that such cases require concrete market share data—Qwant reportedly failed to supply metrics showing Microsoft’s alleged 90% control in syndication deals, a figure often cited in broader EU reports but not verified here.
Furthermore, the decision declines Qwant’s request for interim measures, which would have temporarily halted Microsoft’s practices. Regulatory bodies like the Autorité emphasize the need for “convincing evidence” to proceed, a threshold Qwant could not meet despite earlier threats of legal action in 2025.
Frequently Asked Questions
What Evidence Did Qwant Provide in Its Antitrust Complaint Against Microsoft?
Qwant claimed Microsoft’s practices created economic dependence and limited access to advertising, but the Autorité de la Concurrence ruled that the evidence was insufficient to prove dominance or lack of alternatives. The complaint highlighted bundling of search results and ads, yet regulators found no compelling data to support these assertions, leading to dismissal on November 27, 2025.
Why Is Microsoft Facing Increased Regulatory Scrutiny in Europe?
Microsoft and other Big Tech firms are under closer watch in Europe due to concerns over leveraging dominance in search and software markets to stifle competition. Smaller engines like Qwant, Ecosia, and DuckDuckGo rely on syndication deals, and regulators aim to ensure fair access. This dismissal follows similar EU compromises, such as making Teams optional in Office suites, promoting innovation without heavy fines.
Key Takeaways
- Evidence Threshold: Regulators require strong proof of dominance; Qwant’s case lacked it, setting a precedent for future complaints.
- Alternatives Exist: Qwant’s 2025 partnership shows options beyond Microsoft, weakening claims of market abuse.
- Ongoing Scrutiny: Despite this ruling, Big Tech faces continued pressure in Europe—monitor developments for impacts on search innovation.
Conclusion
The dismissal of Qwant’s antitrust complaint against Microsoft by the Autorité de la Concurrence underscores the rigorous standards for proving market dominance in France’s competition landscape. With no formal investigation launched and interim measures denied, Microsoft reaffirms its focus on quality services and partnerships across Europe. As regulatory pressure on Big Tech antitrust cases persists, smaller search engines must build stronger evidence and explore independent technologies to foster competition—watch for evolving EU policies that could reshape the digital market in the coming years.
