UK Proposes to Let Websites Refuse Google AI Search Use of Their Content

In partnership with

Better prompts. Better AI output.

AI gets smarter when your input is complete. Wispr Flow helps you think out loud and capture full context by voice, then turns that speech into a clean, structured prompt you can paste into ChatGPT, Claude, or any assistant. No more chopping up thoughts into typed paragraphs. Preserve constraints, examples, edge cases, and tone by speaking them once. The result is faster iteration, more precise outputs, and less time re-prompting. Try Wispr Flow for AI or see a 30-second demo.

Start flowing free

The United Kingdom has taken a significant step toward regulating the growing influence of artificial intelligence in online search. Britain’s competition watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), has proposed new measures that would allow websites to opt out of having their content used by Google’s AI Overviews feature. This proposal marks a crucial moment in the global debate over the power of Big Tech, the rights of content publishers, and the future sustainability of online journalism.

Background: Google’s Dominance in Search

Google dominates the online search market in the UK, accounting for more than 90 percent of online search queries, according to the CMA. Over 200,000 UK businesses rely on Google’s search advertising to reach customers, making the platform central to the digital economy. However, this dominance has also raised concerns about unfair competition and excessive control over how information is accessed and monetised.

In October 2025, following a nine-month investigation, the CMA designated Google as having “Strategic Market Status” (SMS) under the UK’s new digital competition framework. This designation allows the regulator to impose tailored rules on companies considered too powerful in their respective markets. The current proposal builds directly on that designation.

What Are AI Overviews?

Google’s AI Overviews are AI-generated summaries that appear at the top of search results. They aim to give users quick answers by synthesising information from multiple sources across the web. While convenient for users, these summaries have triggered strong opposition from publishers, especially news organisations.

Publishers argue that AI Overviews often answer users’ questions directly on Google’s page, reducing the need to click through to the original articles. As a result, publishers lose website traffic, which in turn reduces advertising revenue — a key source of income for many media organisations.

Key Proposals by the CMA

Under the CMA’s proposal, which is open for public consultation until February 25, publishers would gain several important rights and protections:

1. Opt-Out Rights
   Website owners would be allowed to opt out of having their content used to power Google’s AI Overviews or to train AI models outside of traditional search results.

2. Proper Attribution
   Google would be required to take practical steps to ensure that publisher content is clearly attributed in AI-generated results, helping users identify original sources.

3. Fair Ranking Rules
   The CMA is also considering rules to guarantee fair and transparent ranking of search results, which Google would need to demonstrate compliance with.

4. User Choice in Search Engines
   Another proposal includes displaying a choice screen that makes it easier for users to change their default search engine, encouraging competition.

CMA Chief Executive Sarah Cardell stated that these measures would give UK businesses and consumers “more choice and control” over how they interact with Google’s search services. She added that the proposal would provide “a fairer deal for content publishers, particularly news organisations.”

Publishers’ Concerns

Media organisations have long accused AI companies of extracting value from original content without adequate compensation. According to Owen Meredith, Chief Executive of the News Media Association, Google’s practices allow it to “extract valuable data without reward,” harming publishers and giving the company an unfair advantage in the AI market.

Publishers also argue that journalism involves significant costs — including reporting, verification, and editorial oversight — while AI models benefit from this work without sharing revenue. Over time, this could undermine the financial viability of trusted news sources and weaken the overall information ecosystem.

Google’s Response

In response to the CMA’s announcement, Google said it is already exploring updates to its controls that would allow websites to opt out of generative AI search features. However, the company warned that new controls must avoid “breaking search” or creating a fragmented and confusing experience for users.

Ron Eden, Google’s Principal for Product Management, emphasised that search needs to remain reliable and consistent. Google has also repeatedly argued that AI Overviews help users discover content and that search continues to drive significant traffic to publishers.

A Global Regulatory Trend

The UK’s proposed measures are closely modelled on the European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA), which imposes strict obligations on major technology companies such as Google, Apple, and Meta. The DMA aims to prevent market abuse, promote competition, and protect consumers and businesses from unfair practices.

By aligning itself with the EU’s approach, the UK is signalling that it intends to remain a strong regulator of digital markets even after Brexit. If implemented, the CMA’s proposals could set an important precedent for other countries grappling with the challenges posed by AI-driven platforms.

Why This Matters

At stake is the balance between technological innovation and economic fairness. While AI-powered search tools offer speed and convenience, they also risk concentrating power in the hands of a few tech giants while weakening the organisations that produce original, trustworthy information.

The CMA argues that its proposals will help ensure the long-term sustainability of trusted online content, strengthen publishers’ bargaining power, and allow users to better verify sources in AI-generated results. Ultimately, the goal is to build greater trust in both AI technologies and the digital information ecosystem.

Conclusion

The UK’s proposal to let websites refuse the use of their content in Google’s AI search features represents a bold attempt to rebalance power in the digital age. As AI continues to reshape how people access information, the outcome of this regulatory effort could have far-reaching consequences — not just for Google and publishers, but for the future of the open web itself.