These countries appear to have the pecuniary extraction model. Go after the deepest pockets, and come up with some way to take some of their money, because reasons.
I understand the sentiment, but as a logical thought it's incomplete without an analysis of reasons. If the reasons are good, Google deserves to pay (maybe the lawyers don't deserve the penalty money, but that's a separate issue).
Well, the biggest reason is a philosophical difference between Europe and the USA. As noted in the article, after a suit in 2017, (2.4 B Euro) there were a lot of follow on suits. Sweden's is one.
Europe appears to want to limit competition to the point - IMO - where dominance is considered bad and must be punished. There are other search engines out there. There is DDG, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex if you dare. I use Google about once a year - I don't even find it to be the best. But there is something a little odd about the whole thing - I don't think the good citizens of Sweden or other countries are forced to use Google, so it is stretching the concept of a monopoly to a breaking point for me.
I also do not buy the idea that pecuniary extraction is anything other than a cash grab, and despite what some think, there can be a point reached where whoever is supposed to give money to European nations, be it Google, Apple, Microsoft, or whatever company commits the offense du jour - the company might decide there is no longer a profit. Considering that Sweden is not a lot larger in population (around 10 million) than New York City, (8.3 million) you can bet that there are accountants weighing the alternatives. Geoblocking could become a thing. Although from some reading I've done, the EU wants to geoblock, but doesn't want anyone geoblocking them.
Of course many in the EU fully support the fines. Of course they would, it's like a government approved mugging, and might even help with taxes, perhaps social programs.
A personal type situation mi.ght be with my cable service. After the umpteenth price increase from Xfinity, and the latest bill being nearly 300 dollars a month, I decided to move to AT&T streaming service plus internet. More channels, better image quality, and less than half the price each month.
Point is I decided that Xfinity was over priced, and rather than engage in some class action lawsuit (there have been a number of them, I switched to AT&T. I had the choice, just like the good citizens of Sweden and the rest of Europe can do. But Google is dominant, and Europe demands tribute, and demands to limit competition as much as possible. I think this page notes it best: https://thelens.slaughterandma...
"Ensuring a well-functioning internal market is a key priority for the European Commission. This evaluation will help determine whether further measures are needed to address remaining barriers and strengthen cross-border trade in the EU.”
Pretty language to say anti-competitive, and protectionism, where a dominant company is considered a barrier.