Already a subscriber? Make sure to log into your account before viewing this content. You can access your account by hitting the “login” button on the top right corner. Still unable to see the content after signing in? Make sure your card on file is up-to-date.
đť•Ź has officially appealed a multimillion-dollar fine imposed by the European Commission under the Digital Services Act.
Some shit you should know before you dig in: If you’re unaware, the EU enacted the Digital Services Act (DSA) in 2022 to increase “safety” across large online platforms operating within its market. The law requires companies (especially “very large online platforms”) to assess and mitigate systemic risks such as the spread of “illegal” content, “disinformation,” threats to electoral integrity, and harm to minors, while also mandating greater transparency around advertising, algorithmic recommendations, and content moderation practices. It forces platforms to provide vetted researchers with access to certain public data, clearly label advertisements, explain how recommendation systems work, and give users more control over personalized content. The DSA also gives the EU strong enforcement powers, including the authority to launch investigations, demand internal documents, conduct audits, impose interim measures, and levy fines of up to 6% of a company’s global annual revenue for noncompliance.
What’s going on now: In a notable development, Elon Musk’s social media platform đť•Ź has formally appealed a $140 million fine imposed by the European Commission, filing its challenge before the EU’s General Court in Luxembourg. The penalty, issued in December, marked the first fine ever handed down under the Digital Services Act and stemmed from an investigation that began in late 2023 into whether đť•Ź had breached the law’s transparency and risk-mitigation requirements. Regulators concluded that đť•Ź failed to meet advertising transparency obligations and improperly restricted access to certain public data for researchers, while also criticizing the design of its paid verification system.
At the center of the dispute is 𝕏’s decision to allow users to purchase blue checkmarks, previously reserved for verified public figures, which the Commission argued was deceptive and made it harder for users to assess account authenticity. The EU also cited shortcomings in how the platform labeled advertisements and provided transparency around its operations.
In its appeal, 𝕏 claims the Commission conducted what it calls an “incomplete and superficial” investigation marred by “grave procedural errors” and “systematic breaches” of due process. The company argues that regulators misinterpreted the DSA’s obligations, improperly calculated the penalty, and demonstrated prosecutorial bias. 𝕏 maintains that its verification model and platform policies were lawful and that the Commission overstepped its authority.
This all comes amid escalating political friction between the US and EU over the DSA. President Trump has repeatedly criticized the EU for using digital regulations to target American technology companies, accusing European officials of unfairly penalizing US firms such as Meta, Apple, and others under competition and content laws.
As of now, there’s been no comment from President Trump on this.
