How is what Google does conceptually different to the results you see when you search for a stock code on Yahoo (Y Finance result inserted above the natural results) or a local search in Bing (map and local results inserted above the natural results)?
Google may insert more of their own products into / above more terms, but you can argue (and I'm sure they will) that that just demonstrates that they do a better job of interpreting and serving the users query. It's a bit of a tired old cliche, but no-one is forced to use Google for anything. In cases where other services do something better than the Google product, people use those other services. Look at how much stuff they have released that has just bombed. Is that really the sign of market abuse?
I'm far from being a Google fanboi, but this whole thing stinks of third rate services crying to the authorities that someone is doing their job better than they do. If Google can be proved to have abused their position, of course they should be punished, but they shouldn't be punished for the fact that a lot of people use them, rather than someone else