I have seen several comments that basically say "Google puts customers first, but this goes against the EU's strong preference to protect local workers." It is

I have seen several comments that basically say "Google puts customers first, but this goes against the EU's strong preference to protect local workers." It is not "customers over workers" it is "customers over local corporations with less developed products". Google has offices in 40 different countries (https://www.google.com/about/careers/locations/ https://www.google.com/about/careers/locations/). Workers could easily go work for Google without moving to America...and Google offers some of the best, most competitive career prospects of any company. Until this changes, there is no reason to presume that Google's behavior in Europe is somehow hurting "workers." Sure, if Google was providing inferior products, and paying its workers lower-than-market salaries and abusing its dominance to keep better products out of the market, then all of this fuss would make sense. Fear of this happening at some point is not, in my opinion, a good justification for such heavy resistance to Google's activities. We shouldn't confuse the interests of local (i.e. European) corporations with the interests of the people. It being harder for a Danish company, for example, to enter the online search, mapping, or shopping market doesn't mean it is harder for Danish people to work in online search, mapping, or shopping. It also does not mean it is harder for Danish people use high-quality products in these industries. I don't see how Google's actions so far constitute "abuse of dominance" even if you take a protection-of-workers stance...only if you take a "protection of the local corporate CEO" stance.