Is that quoted out of context? If not, that sounds worrying.
"In 2010, Google began incorporating the content that it indexed from its competitors into Google Local without permission. Although Google had previously acknowledged that it needed a license to use Yelp’s content, it was now using it without permission to prop up its own, less effective product. In some instances, Google even presented this content to its users as if it were its own. [See Exhibit C]
Google’s Offers a False Choice
In response to our objections, Google informed us that it would cease the practice only if we agreed to be removed from Google’s web search index, thereby preventing Yelp from appearing anywhere in Google web search results. This, of course, was a false choice. Google’s dominant position in the market prevents services like Yelp from exercising any sort of meaningful choice in the matter: it is a choice between allowing Google to co-opt one’s content and not competing at all."
So in a sense, it's really just another search engine again, no different than the universal Google search, image search, product search, and etc. It's using the same indexed data but presented in two forms. Yelp wanted Google to remove them from product search and not universal search. This is why the google lawyer said this requires extra engineering. Yelp basically wants one thing and not another.
If you do a product search now, of course, you don't see any Yelp links at all (since they requested Google to remove them) and you see no snippets from any other review sites. All you see are google's own reviews and then some links on the bottom showing show more reviews from other sites. This was changed - and I think it makes it worse for Yelp and other review sites - but they wanted it this way.