Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a Digital Agenda for the European Union 2020

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Censorship from Plato to Social Media

Part of the book series: Law, Governance and Technology Series ((LGTS,volume 61))

  • 191 Accesses

Abstract

At the very end of 2020, the press was full of headlines such as “A bill has been presented that could significantly erode the power of big technology companies in Europe.” There were caustic voices, such as “Digital market warns of misguided EU regulation” but there were also jubilant ones, with headlines such as “European Commission publishes landmark package to regulate digital platforms and services.” What is certain is that the two legislative proposals could fundamentally change and define the digital regulatory landscape in the European Union and, in the longer term, create a predictable environment. This chapter aims to interpret the likely future steps by outlining the main regulatory plans contained in the Digital Services Package (Digital Services Act – Digital Markets Act).

“If it is not already clear, Facebook is not compatible with democracy.” (David Cicilline, the Chairman of the US House of Representatives Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law. Twitter, 17 Feb 2021, https://twitter.com/davidcicilline/status/1362172969699704833/)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Bobák (2020).

  2. 2.

    Török (2020).

  3. 3.

    Cunningham (2020).

  4. 4.

    Cengiz and Others v Turkey App nos 48226/10 and 14027/11 (ECtHR, 1 December 2015), [49.].

  5. 5.

    Stelter (2021).

  6. 6.

    Toor (2017).

  7. 7.

    Meyer (2021).

  8. 8.

    Easton (2021).

  9. 9.

    Huszák (2021).

  10. 10.

    Cengiz and Others v Turkey App nos 48226/10 and 14027/11 (ECtHR, 1 December 2015), [52.].

  11. 11.

    See Sect. 5.2

  12. 12.

    Kim and Telman (2015), pp. 723–770.

  13. 13.

    For details, see Sect. 9.

  14. 14.

    Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act), PE/30/2022/REV/1, OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, pp 1–102.

  15. 15.

    Regulations are legal acts which, once they enter into force, apply automatically and uniformly to all EU countries, without the need for transposition into national law. They are binding in their entirety on all EU countries. See de Witte (2008), pp. 79–108.

  16. 16.

    Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC, COM/2020/825 final (DSA Proposal).

  17. 17.

    “The DSA’s overarching principle is consumer protection.” Petrányi (2022), p. 9.

  18. 18.

    DSA Proposal, Explanatory memorandum, 2.; Moravec et al. (2021), pp. 166–185.

  19. 19.

    DSA Proposal, Explanatory memorandum, 2.

  20. 20.

    Ibid., 1.

  21. 21.

    DSA, Chapter III, Section 5.

  22. 22.

    The first list of 17 VLOPs and 2 very large online search engines VLOSEs was published in May 2023 and the “sole European-originated company that made the cut is Zalando, a German online fashion retailer.” Detrekői (2023). In addition, on 27 June 2023, Zalando filed a legal challenge against the European Commission’s decision, challenging the classification. Amazon has also joined this action. Kirton et al. (2023).

  23. 23.

    European Parliament (2022a).

  24. 24.

    Libor (2021), p. 21.

  25. 25.

    DSA, Article 89.

  26. 26.

    “Articles 12 to 15 of Directive 2000/31/EC are deleted.” See Sect. 4.4.3.

  27. 27.

    Cauffman and Goanta (2021), pp. 3–4.

  28. 28.

    https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/digital-services-act-ensuring-safe-and-accountable-online-environment_en.

  29. 29.

    Török (2021).

  30. 30.

    Klein (2023), p. 286.

  31. 31.

    DSA, Article 22.

  32. 32.

    DSA, Article 10.: “Information provided to the recipient of the service shall include a statement of reasons and the possibilities for redress that exist.”

  33. 33.

    DSA, Article 72.

  34. 34.

    Capello (2021), pp. 40–47.

  35. 35.

    DSA, Article 33(1).

  36. 36.

    Broughton Micova (2021), p. 5.

  37. 37.

    DSA, Article 49(1).

  38. 38.

    Favro and Zolynski (2021), pp. 217–223.

  39. 39.

    DSA, Articles 44–48.

  40. 40.

    Van Canneyt (2021).

  41. 41.

    DSA, Article 89(2).

  42. 42.

    DSA, Article 16.

  43. 43.

    It is worth pointing out that although NAM in the DSA would replace the former NTDS, Aleksandra Kuczerawy notes that there is a conceptual ambiguity in the legislation, as the concept of NAM “covers a variety of mechanisms designed to eliminate illegal or infringing content from the Internet upon request of the right holder.” In other words, one type of NAM is the NTDS, another is the NSD, and the third is the “notice and notification system” (NN), i.e. where the service provider, after receiving a notification, also sends a notification to the content uploader requesting the voluntary removal of the content. Kuczerawy (2018), p. 38.

  44. 44.

    Wilman (2023), p. 47.

  45. 45.

    DSA, Article 16(2); Kuczerawy (2023), pp. 173–174.

  46. 46.

    DSA, Article 16(3).

  47. 47.

    DSA, Article 16(6).

  48. 48.

    DSA, Article 8; Ződi (2023), p. 188.

  49. 49.

    DSA, Article 52(3).

  50. 50.

    DSA, Article 70(1).

  51. 51.

    See Sect. 4.4.4.

  52. 52.

    Yar et al. (2020).

  53. 53.

    Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Rechtsdurchsetzung in sozialen Netzwerken (Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz, NetzDG), BGBl. I S. 3352; Kéringer (2023), pp. 413–418.

  54. 54.

    Although the French Constitutional Court declared it unconstitutional on 18 June 2020. Psychogiopoulou and de la Sierra (2022), p. 1.

  55. 55.

    Bundesgesetz über Maßnahmen zum Schutz der Nutzer auf Kommunikationsplattformen (Kommunikationsplattformen-Gesetz, KoPl-G), BGBl. I Nr. 151/2020. Cf. Mchangama and Fiss (2019).

  56. 56.

    Golunova (2021).

  57. 57.

    Delfi AS v Estonia App no. 64569/09 (ECtHR, 16 June 2015), Joint dissenting opinion of Judges Sajó and Tsotsoria, 2.

  58. 58.

    DSA, Article 16(2) a).

  59. 59.

    Barata (2021), p. 15.

  60. 60.

    Moreover, this can be compared with the trend for service providers to take action on certain content within one hour. Regulation (EU) 2021/784 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 on addressing the dissemination of terrorist content online, PE/19/2021/INIT, OJ L 172, 17.5.2021, pp 79–109.

  61. 61.

    European Parliament News (2021).

  62. 62.

    Barata (2021), p. 15.

  63. 63.

    Janal (2021).

  64. 64.

    Peukert (2021).

  65. 65.

    Mussard (2020).

  66. 66.

    European Commission (2020).

  67. 67.

    Regulation (EU) 2022/1925 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2022 on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector and amending Directives (EU) 2019/1937 and (EU) 2020/1828 (Digital Markets Act), PE/17/2022/REV/1, OJ L 265, 12.10.2022, pp 1–66.

  68. 68.

    DMA, Article 3(1).

  69. 69.

    DMA, Article 2(2).

  70. 70.

    Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector, COM/2020/842 final (DMA Proposal), 3–4.

  71. 71.

    Capello (2021), pp. 86–90.

  72. 72.

    See DMA Proposal, Explanatory Memorandum, 2: “Almost 24% of total online trade in Europe is cross-border.”

  73. 73.

    Bálint (2023).

  74. 74.

    DMA, Article 3(2).

  75. 75.

    “The purpose of the DMA is to prevent the distortion of competition” Domokos and Belyakova (2022), p. 5.

  76. 76.

    The first list of gatekeepers was published in September 2023 and “Microsoft and Apple are reportedly pushing to keep Bing and iMessage, respectively, off the list”. Robertson (2023).

  77. 77.

    European Parliament (2022b).

  78. 78.

    European Commission (2020).

  79. 79.

    DMA Proposal, 36.

  80. 80.

    Fasquelle and Inacio (2021), pp. 4–11.

  81. 81.

    For example, signing in to Gmail mailbox does not automatically sign into the YouTube account.

  82. 82.

    For example, allowing non-Apple devices to use the Apple App Store.

  83. 83.

    DMA, Article 6(9).

  84. 84.

    DMA, Article 30(1).

  85. 85.

    DMA, Article 24.

  86. 86.

    See Sect. 6.1.2.

  87. 87.

    Rodríguez de las Heras Ballell (2021).

  88. 88.

    Ma et al. (2015), pp. 85–98.

  89. 89.

    Clément Perarnaud’s study on EU Member States’ preferences and coalitions for the Digital Single Market between 2016 and 2019 could be a sign of things to come. Perarnaud (2021).

  90. 90.

    Podszun et al. (2021).

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, Eötvös Loránd University (ELTE), Budapest, Hungary

    Gergely Gosztonyi

Authors
  1. Gergely Gosztonyi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Gosztonyi, G. (2023). Towards a Digital Agenda for the European Union 2020. In: Censorship from Plato to Social Media. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol 61. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46529-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-46529-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-46528-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-46529-1

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation