An ad-block shock: France v Google IN 2011 Google spent over €100m ($130m) on grand 19th-century digs in Paris which look a little like the Elysée Palace, the official home of the president. That may have been a mistake. The firm's deep coffers have now attracted the attention of Xavier Niel, an entrepreneur who delights in making pots of money at the expense of the establishment. On January 3rd Mr Niel's company, Free, which is France's second-biggest internet-service provider (ISP), upgraded the software on the modems it supplies to customers. Online ads were blocked by default. The move, which was aimed chiefly at Google, caused a massive rumpus. The American firm had reportedly been in negotiations with Free over whether to pay the ISP directly for the connection to its subscribers. On the internet, the convention is that ISPs such as Free cover the cost of their networks by charging their subscribers rather than providers of content. Google is accustomed to grumbles by ISPs that it does not contribute directly to the cost of their networks. It is also used to governments, such as China's, blocking its services for political reasons. But never has it faced an attack of this type from a private company. Free was showing its clout by threatening to damage Google's advertising-driven business model in France. Mr Niel's calculation was that few of his 5m-odd customers would leave just because the default settings deprived them of Google's ads. Default settings are quite easy to change, after all. Free is also suspected of deliberately choking off its subscribers" connection to YouTube, Google's video-streaming service, during peak hours. YouTube takes up lots of bandwidth on the internet, especially as more people choose to watch "Gangnam Style" and "Dumb Ways to Die" in high definition. The telecoms regulator is investigating. Mr Niel responded to the accusations last year by pointing out that many YouTube videos can in any case be watched on Dailymotion, a video-sharing website that happens to be French and partly owned by the government. Advertisers and newspaper websites immediately cried foul and got the government to lean on Free to remove the ad block, which it did on January 8th. Supporters of network neutrality, the idea that the internet's tubes should treat all packets of data in exactly the same way regardless of origin, denounced Free for trampling on web freedom. Despite the government's involvement in ending the block, Mr Niel may have its tacit support for his move against Google. France is already investigating whether the company pays much less tax than it should (it charges French advertisers from its headquarters in Ireland). Free's strike at Google may even give the hungry finance ministry ideas about how to force it to pay more taxes, says Cédric Manara, a professor of internet law at EDHEC, a French business school. French newspapers, too, are trying to force Google to pay them for referencing their content. This week Fleur Pellerin, France's digital minister, said, backing Free, that there are real questions over how web firms contribute to the financing of networks. There will be a government debate on the subject on January 15th. Many people expect the fight to continue well after that. The stakes are high. Should Google cave in to Free in France by paying high fees to reach its subscribers, it would face calls to do the same elsewhere. Google can argue that the only reason why ISPs like Free have a business model at all is that people want the content that it and other companies provide. Mr Niel will be loth to raise more revenue by charging subscribers more when cheapness is his selling point. Free's launch of a cheap mobile-phone service last year had a spectacular impact on the French market, notes François Godard of Enders Analysis, a research firm. The average price of all French mobile-phone calls fell by nearly a fifth as millions of people flocked to his new product. For this he is heartily disliked by rival French telecoms bosses. But if he can win against Google, they will be toasting him with champagne.