It's kind of hard to pick a side in this. On one hand, free access to information is important and so is a level playing field. On the other hand, Google are indeed making a TON of money by practically republishing snippets of other people's contents. They have become kind of a monopoly and a gate-keeper to the internet when it comes to actively looking for information. They should certainly be kept in check, but I'm not certain such taxes have any bearing on that.

My argument would be that the snippets should actually fall into a fair-use category like it is in the US (if I understand the laws there correctly) and Google doesn't exactly make their cash because their service becomes valuable because of the snippets. Their service becomes valuable when it actually sends you to a publisher or a website, so Google are providing value to the publishers as well.

A solution I would be in favor of would probably be for the publishers to be able to explicitly state if they want to be included in Google's snippets. Oh, wait, but that exists already. You can tell Google's crawlers that you don't want your site indexed and then your snippets (or your website) will not appear in search results. If you want to be in the search results, you should allow the snippets, right?

I think your suggestion that the snippets of EU publishers would be skipped might not be a possible implication of this ruling, because I don't know if snippet usage is going to be illegal for sources based in the EU or for visitors based in the EU regardless of the source or a combination of both.

If indeed it will be possible for Google to display snippets to people that are in let's say France for French content that comes from servers located in jurisdictions where snippets are fair use, this would actually hurt local French news outlets and would favor outside sources. It might also provide very good opportunity for website owners that could publish content in languages spoken in the EU to exploit. If that's the case, I'm sure many publications would open out of EU subsidiaries (or at least move to out of EU servers) so they can keep their place and snippets in the search results and cater to EU audiences. Which would be a pretty lame paradox.

While I'm not really a fan many libertarian positions, with the internet being international and wanting it to be free, I tend to be against most types of regulations that might limit its usefulness as this seems to be the case with this one. Also, different countries putting in different regulations is slowly eating away at the internet's international appeal and the equality of all netizens.