Amazon Challenges EU's Digital Content Rules

Facts

• On Tuesday, Amazon became the first US company to take legal action over the European Union's Digital Services Act (DSA), which places tighter restrictions on very large online platforms (VLOPs) — any platform with at least 45M monthly users.¹
• As one of 19 companies classified as a VLOP, the DSA mandates Amazon must protect users from hate speech, misinformation, and other harmful content.²
• However, Amazon claims that it falls outside the DSA's scope since it neither distributes speech or information, nor does it generate substantial revenue through advertising.³
• A statement from the company further alleged it had been "unfairly singled out," and noted that it's not the largest online retailer in any of the EU countries where it operates.³
• Any company under the purview of the DSA that fails to comply with its regulations — which include compelling VLOPs to complete risk assessments and perform external auditing — could face fines of up to 6% of their annual revenue.⁴
• Two weeks ago, German online retailer Zalando became the first company to take legal action against the DSA. Companies such as Zalando have been targeted under the legislation as it includes provisions to ensure and regulate the authenticity of products sold digitally.⁵

Sources: ¹Reuters, ²ABC News, ³Verge, ⁴CNBC, and ⁵FT.

Narratives

• Narrative A, as provided by The Register. Amazon's laughable attempt to claim it's not a VLOP will surely be rejected by EU courts, which intend to keep the bloc a world leader in reigning in the worst abuses of Big Tech. By putting a greater burden on the largest and most successful platforms, the EU is preserving a free internet while keeping citizens safe. Amazon does not have a leg to stand on in this dispute.
• Narrative B, as provided by Los Angeles Times. While the goals of the DSA might be noble, the EU is setting itself on a collision course with free expression through their far-reaching regulation. Countries in the EU hold subjective and variable definitions of illegal content, which is why everything — from satire to pro-LGBTQ+ media — risks being erased from social media through the enforcement of this act. By compelling online platforms to become government censors, the DSA is only harming the general public, not regulating Big Tech.

Predictions