The Digital Networks Act’s Scope Creep: How Article 9 Paves a Sneaky Pathway to Network Fees
Main takeaways For years, many dismissed warnings about telecom giants’ demands for ‘network fees’ as mere speculation or fearmongering, given […]
Disruptive Competition Project
655 15th St., NW
Suite 410
Washington, D.C. 20005
Phone: (202) 783-0070
Fax: (202) 783-0534
Section
European Union
Main takeaways For years, many dismissed warnings about telecom giants’ demands for ‘network fees’ as mere speculation or fearmongering, given […]
Parts of Europe face a housing crisis, and the European Commission wants to act. But there is a problem: building homes, urban planning, and social housing are the responsibility of national, regional, and local governments. Housing is, for the most part, simply not an EU competence. To its credit, the Commission’s wider plan reflects this, most of its 10 actions address the real drivers: supply, investment, and vacant homes. The forthcoming Affordable Housing Act is the exception, targeting short-term rental (STR) services instead.
As the geopolitical map is being redrawn in real time, the European Union finds itself at a critical juncture regarding its digital future. While debates over tech sovereignty and ‘Buy European’ policies intensify in Brussels, it is imperative for policymakers to focus on ensuring that new laws enhance, not hinder, Europe’s competitiveness and long-term security.
Since early 2025, LaLiga (Spain’s top-tier football league) has been operating an aggressive and largely unchecked IP-address blocking regime in an attempt to tackle sports piracy. In 2024, LaLiga and several Spanish internet service providers, some of whom have direct commercial interests in LaLiga broadcasting, sought a court order authorising the blocking of specific domain names.
Recent discussions on simplifying EU tech rules have revealed a rare point of consensus: Europe’s rulebook is overdue for a serious overhaul. However, as co-legislators are now unpicking the details of the European Commission’s Digital Omnibus proposal, covering everything from cybersecurity to data and privacy, warning lights are starting to flash.
This May marks three years since the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) came into force. While the DMA was supposed to promote ‘contestability’ and ‘fairness’ in digital markets by curbing so-called ‘gatekeeper’ companies, a troubling gap is emerging between regulatory theory and how the European Commission’s enforcement of the DMA is affecting internet users in practice.
On 10 March, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) will hold the first public hearing in the ‘Like Company v. Google Ireland’ case. In brief, the case was brought by a Hungarian news publisher, which claims that the Gemini AI chatbot infringed its rights by allegedly copying news articles without permission.
As the European Commission prepares to revise the Cybersecurity Act (CSA), Europe faces a critical moment to learn from past mistakes. Originally adopted in 2019 to build trust in information and communications technology (ICT) products and services, the CSA has yet to produce a single technology-specific certification scheme ready for adoption across the EU market.
Everyone in the digital sector shares responsibility for safeguarding young people online. Yet as policymakers across Europe debate new measures to protect minors on the internet, a pressing question arises: aren’t we about to inadvertently curb the very freedoms that once made the internet a space for growth, creativity, and connection?
The European Union is seeking to modernise consumer protection, and has announced plans for a Digital Fairness Act (DFA) in 2026. The process began in 2024, when the European Commission published its Digital Fairness Fitness Check, evaluating whether EU consumer laws remain fit for purpose and identifying harmful online practices.