Yazılar

Amazon Challenges EU’s ‘Very Large Online Platform’ Label, Citing Lack of Systemic Risk

/in /tarafından

Amazon has asked Europe’s General Court in Luxembourg to overturn its designation as a “very large online platform” (VLOP) under the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA). The U.S. e-commerce giant argues that it does not pose systemic risks to users that would justify the stricter regulatory requirements imposed by the label.

The DSA, which came into force in 2022, targets large tech companies, requiring those classified as VLOPs to implement enhanced measures to combat illegal and harmful content. These measures include comprehensive risk management, independent auditing, and data sharing with regulators and researchers.

Amazon’s legal counsel, Robert Spano, told the court that online marketplaces like Amazon’s store do not create systemic risks, and that VLOP rules are ineffective in preventing the spread of illegal or counterfeit goods on such platforms. He emphasized that any risks are limited to individual customers rather than the platform’s entire user base, and existing product safety laws already address these issues.

Spano criticized the use of size as a metric for risk, describing it as “arbitrary, disproportionate and discriminatory.”

The court is expected to deliver its verdict in the coming months.

Other major tech companies, including Meta Platforms, TikTok, and German retailer Zalando, have also contested aspects of the DSA.

Meta and TikTok Challenge EU Tech Supervisory Fees at General Court

/in /tarafından

Meta Platforms and TikTok have taken their dispute over the European Union’s supervisory fees to the EU General Court, the bloc’s second highest judicial authority. Both companies argue that the fees imposed under the 2022 Digital Services Act (DSA) are disproportionate and based on flawed calculations.

The DSA requires large online platforms, including Meta, TikTok, and 16 other firms, to pay an annual supervisory fee of 0.05% of their global net income. This fee is intended to cover the European Commission’s costs for monitoring compliance with the law. The fee’s size depends on each company’s average monthly active users and their profit or loss status in the previous year.

Meta questioned the methodology used by the Commission, saying it unfairly applied group-level revenue rather than that of the subsidiary. Meta’s lawyer, Assimakis Komninos, criticized the fee’s calculation as opaque and inconsistent with the DSA’s principles, describing it as a “black box” that led to “implausible and absurd results.”

TikTok, owned by ByteDance, echoed these concerns. TikTok’s lawyer Bill Batchelor accused the Commission of inflating fees through double-counting users who access the platform on multiple devices and argued that the fee exceeded legal limits by referencing group profits rather than individual entities.

The European Commission defended its approach. Commission lawyer Lorna Armati said using consolidated group profits was justified, as the group’s total financial resources are available to pay the fee. She also rejected claims of insufficient transparency or unfair treatment.

The court is expected to deliver its ruling on these cases, Meta Platforms Ireland v Commission and TikTok Technology v Commission, next year.

Brazil’s Supreme Court Moves Toward Holding Social Media Platforms Accountable for User Posts

/in /tarafından

Brazil’s Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that social media platforms may be held responsible for certain illegal content posted by users on their sites, though key details of the ruling remain unresolved. In a preliminary vote, six of the 11 justices favored holding platforms accountable, which could lead to fines for companies that fail to remove unlawful posts.

This decision affects major players like Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, TikTok, Elon Musk’s X, and Alphabet’s Google in Brazil’s vast market of over 200 million users. Currently, under Brazilian law, platforms are only liable if they ignore a court order to remove content. The court majority sees this as a “veil of irresponsibility,” as Justice Gilmar Mendes stated, since companies are not presently held accountable even when aware of illegal content.

Meta warned in a 2024 statement that such a ruling could make platforms liable for nearly all types of content without prior notification. Google expressed openness to improving the law but emphasized the need for clear procedures to avoid legal uncertainty and indiscriminate content removal. TikTok and X representatives in Brazil did not respond to requests for comment.

The court has yet to define which content types would be considered illegal and is working towards consensus. Four judges are yet to vote in this ongoing trial, with the next session scheduled for Thursday. Changing earlier votes is possible but rare.