Thursday 24 August 2023

Tomorrow Never Dies: VLOPs debacle

Most of us in the consumer protection field celebrate that as of tomorrow, August 25th, the obligations of the Digital Services Act (DSA) will start binding very large online search engines (VLOSEs) and online platforms (VLOPs). 

By James Yarema on Unsplash
The European Commission designated the first set of VLOPs and VLOSEs on April 25th (see here). To recall, VLOSEs encompass Bing and Google Search, whilst VLOPs are: Alibaba AliExpress, Amazon Store, Apple AppStore, Booking.com, Facebook, Google Play, Google Maps, Google Shopping, Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Snapchat, TikTok, Twitter, Wikipedia, YouTube and Zalando. 

The designation occurred on the basis of the self-reported user data (more than 10% of EU population as active users) and the platforms were given 4 months to start complying with the obligations that the DSA introduced for VLOPs and VLOSEs. These obligations aim to improve transparency (detailed reporting obligations etc), user empowerment (improved content moderation, opt-out from profiling/recommenders systems, enhanced minors protection, bans on advertisements based on sensitive data etc) and facilitate enforcement (via reporting and cooperation obligations).

Unsurprisingly, we have already seen some pushback against these new obligations. Namely, Amazon Store brought an action to the General Court claiming that it should not have been seen as a VLOP (see case T-367/32) and that some of the DSA obligations should not be applicable to it (duty to provide users with an option for reach recommender system that is not based on profiling; duty to compile and publish an advertisement repository). The arguments that Amazon Store brings in are based on the principle of equal treatment and the need to protect Amazon's fundamental rights. The latter is quite ironic, considering that one of the contested obligations, on ensuring that users may opt for not being profiled, aims to protect the fundamental right of users' privacy.

This claim may have just been a strategy from Amazon Store to delay its compliance with the DSA. It is hard to imagine that they would be successful in proving that they are not a VLOP (see also BEUC's commentary on this here). We will follow this case but for now, let us hope that tomorrow brings a positive change!