You apparently don't get it. The user being able to switch is material to the question of Google being monopolistic. If Google is not monopolistic, antitrust regulations shouldn't apply.

When the consumer has the free choice to switch, there is no justifiable cause to violate the liberty of the company. Though apparently the EU disagrees.

Perhaps it is not very know what the article 102 of the TFEU says:

> Any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the internal market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible with the internal market in so far as it may affect trade between Member States."

Such abuse may, in particular, consist in:

    (a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions;
    (b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers;
    (c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage;
    (d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts. 

And there is no mention of monopoly, what it is used is "dominant position".

Correct. And even the FTC found them guilty of abusing that: http://3rxg9qea18zhtl6s2u8jammft-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-...

I quite clearly admitted the EU disagrees. You're talking about what the law is, which I don't dispute.

So, monopolies that don't directly supply consumers can not exist?