Jurisdiction

Google loses European court battle over Android Auto access

Europe’s top court has ruled that Google’s decision to block an Enel e-mobility app from Android Auto could be considered an abuse of market power. The judgment reinforces competition rules and may push major tech firms to allow easier access for rival apps.

The case stemmed from a €102 million fine imposed by Italy’s antitrust authority in 2021 for restricting access to Enel’s JuicePass app.

Google challenged the penalty, arguing security concerns and the absence of a specific app template. However, the Court of Justice of the European Union backed the Italian regulator, stating that dominant companies must ensure interoperability unless valid security risks exist.

The court clarified that companies should develop necessary templates within a reasonable timeframe.

Although Google has since introduced the requested feature, the ruling may set a precedent for similar cases. Legal experts see it as aligning with EU competition law, citing past decisions against IBM and Microsoft.

The ruling also supports the objectives of the Digital Markets Act, which aims to regulate dominant digital platforms.

The decision is final and unappealable, meaning the Italian Council of State must now rule on Google’s appeal in line with the court’s findings.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

Italy demands 12.5 million euros from X over tax probe

Italy is demanding 12.5 million euros ($13 million) from Elon Musk’s social network X following a tax probe linked to a broader investigation into Meta. The case, which focuses on value-added tax (VAT) claims for the years 2016 to 2022, is significant as it raises questions about how social networks provide access to their services. Italian tax authorities argue that user registrations on platforms like X, Facebook, and Instagram should be considered taxable transactions, as they involve the exchange of personal data for a membership account.

This case could have major implications for the tech sector in Europe, potentially altering the way business models are structured in the 27-nation European Union, as VAT is a harmonised EU tax. Although the claim of 12.5 million euros is a small amount for X, the outcome of this case could influence future tax policies across the region. Both X and Meta must respond to the tax authority’s observations by late March or early April, with the option to either accept the charges or challenge them in court.

The investigation also comes at a sensitive time, as US President Donald Trump has criticised digital taxes in countries like Italy that target US tech firms. Musk, who has strong ties with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, is also keen to expand his Starlink business in the country. If no agreement is reached, Italy’s Revenue Agency may pursue a lengthy judicial review, which could take up to 10 years to resolve.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

Nvidia takes legal action against EU antitrust investigation

Nvidia has filed a lawsuit against the European Commission for accepting a referral from Italy to review its acquisition of AI startup Run:ai. The US chipmaker argues that the Commission violated a recent court ruling that restricts its powers over minor transactions. This case follows growing concerns over the Commission’s use of Article 22, which allows it to review smaller mergers that fall below EU merger thresholds, a move companies have criticised as overreach.

While the case will not impact the approval of the AI‘s deal, which was cleared in December, a ruling in favour of Nvidia could curb the European Commission’s ability to regulate similar transactions in the future. Nvidia argues that the decision breaches legal principles, including proportionality and equal treatment, and undermines legal certainty for businesses operating in the EU.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

Indonesia and Apple close deal to end iPhone 16 ban

Indonesia and Apple have reportedly reached an agreement to lift the country’s ban on iPhone 16s, with a potential deal expected to be signed this week. The ban was imposed in October after Apple failed to meet the requirement that smartphones sold in Indonesia must include at least 35% locally-made parts.

As part of the agreement, Apple will invest $1 billion into a manufacturing plant in Indonesia, focused on producing components for smartphones and other products. Additionally, Apple will commit to training local workers in research and development, expanding beyond its existing Apple academies. However, Apple has no immediate plans to begin iPhone production in the country.

Neither Apple nor Indonesia’s Ministry for Industry have responded to requests for comment on the matter.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

EU court sides with Italy in Google antitrust case

The European Court of Justice has backed Italy‘s antitrust authority in a ruling against Google, stating that the tech giant’s refusal to allow Enel’s JuicePass app to work with its Android Auto platform could constitute an abuse of market power. This decision supports a 2021 fine of 102 million euros imposed by the Italian watchdog after Google blocked the e-mobility app. Google had argued that the refusal was due to security concerns and the absence of a specific template for compatibility, but the court disagreed, stating that dominant companies must ensure their platforms are interoperable with third-party apps unless doing so would harm security.

Although Google has since resolved the issue, the ruling sets a precedent for future cases involving platform dominance. The court acknowledged that companies could refuse interoperability if it compromises platform security, but if this is not the case, they must develop a compatible template in a reasonable timeframe. Google claimed the feature was only relevant to a small percentage of cars in Italy at the time, but the ruling now forces the company to comply with the antitrust decision. The case is final and cannot be appealed, and the Italian Council of State will follow the court’s guidance in its future ruling.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

Musk’s X wins court motion to remove judge in German election data case

Elon Musk-owned social media platform X has succeeded in removing a judge from a German court case concerning demands for real-time election data.

The case, brought by activist groups Democracy Reporting International and the Society for Civil Rights, aimed to secure immediate access to data from the February 23 German election to monitor misinformation.

Although a Berlin court initially supported the activists’ request, X filed a motion arguing the judge had shown bias by interacting with the plaintiffs’ social media posts. The court approved the motion, though similar claims against two other judges were dismissed.

The ruling means that the activists will not receive the requested data within their critical timeframe. A hearing on the matter is set for February 27, but any ruling will come too late to influence their election monitoring efforts in Germany.

However, the decision could establish an important precedent for future transparency cases involving social media platforms. The activists had argued that while some election data is technically accessible, it is not realistically obtainable without direct access from X.

X has also announced plans to sue the German government over what it calls excessive user data requests, claiming these demands violate privacy and freedom of expression.

The German digital affairs ministry acknowledged X’s public statements but confirmed that no formal lawsuits had been filed yet. The escalating legal dispute highlights growing tensions between Musk and German authorities, particularly as the country prepares for key elections amid concerns over misinformation.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

Rumble and Trump Media take legal action in US against Brazilian judge

Trump Media & Technology Group and Rumble have filed an emergency motion in a US court against Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes. The firms argue that his orders violate US sovereignty, constitutional rights, and laws.

The dispute began when Moraes ordered Rumble to suspend its services in Brazil until it complied with local regulations. The judge also threatened criminal charges against Rumble’s CEO, Chris Pavlovski, for non-compliance. The company had previously sued Moraes in a US court over alleged illegal censorship.

Moraes has been a key figure in Brazil’s crackdown on disinformation, particularly during Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency.

He has also ordered fines and restrictions on accounts linked to Bolsonaro allies, including Allan dos Santos, who is under investigation for spreading false information.

The Brazilian Supreme Court has yet to respond to the motion, while Rumble and Trump Media continue their legal battle in the US.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

SEC drops investigation into OpenSea

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has decided to close its investigation into NFT marketplace OpenSea, marking a significant win for the cryptocurrency industry. OpenSea’s CEO, Devin Finzer, shared the news, calling it a victory for creators and innovators in the space. He expressed relief that the SEC would not classify NFTs as securities, as this could have hindered progress and innovation.

The move follows a similar announcement from Coinbase, where the SEC dropped its case against the exchange. The shift towards a more relaxed regulatory stance under the current administration is seen as a sign that the crypto industry may be gaining ground.

In addition to the regulatory win, OpenSea has announced a new SEA token airdrop, rewarding loyal users of its platform and Seaport protocol. Though details on the launch remain unclear, the move has excited the community. OpenSea has also launched OS2, a new multi-chain trading platform, further enhancing its services.

The SEC’s decision signals a shift in the regulatory landscape, as crypto-friendly policies seem to gain momentum under the influence of pro-crypto figures within the agency.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu. 

Australia slaps A$1 million fine on Telegram

Australia’s eSafety Commission has fined messaging platform Telegram A$1 million ($640,000) for failing to respond promptly to questions regarding measures it took to prevent child abuse and extremist content. The Commission had asked social media platforms, including Telegram, to provide details on their efforts to combat harmful content. Telegram missed the May 2024 deadline, submitting its response in October, which led to the fine.

eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant emphasised the importance of timely transparency and adherence to Australian law. Telegram, however, disagreed with the penalty, stating that it had fully responded to the questions, and plans to appeal the fine, which it claims was solely due to the delay in response time.

The fine comes amid increasing global scrutiny of Telegram, with growing concerns over its use by extremists. Australia’s spy agency recently noted that a significant portion of counter-terrorism cases involved youth, highlighting the increasing risk posed by online extremist content. If Telegram does not comply with the penalty, the eSafety Commission could pursue further legal action.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.

US lawmakers criticise EU’s Digital Markets Act

US House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan has called on European Union antitrust chief Teresa Ribera to clarify how the EU enforces its Digital Markets Act (DMA), which he believes disproportionately targets American companies. His request follows a memorandum signed by US President Donald Trump, warning that the administration would scrutinise the EU’s new rules regulating how US companies interact with consumers in Europe.

Jordan and his co-signatory, Scott Fitzgerald, criticised the DMA’s hefty fines, which can reach up to 10% of a company’s global revenue for violations. They argue that the rules not only disadvantage US companies but also potentially benefit Chinese firms, stifling innovation and handing over valuable data to adversarial nations. The letter urges Ribera to address these concerns with the judiciary committee by March 10.

The European Commission, where Ribera is the second-highest official, has rejected claims that its laws are aimed at American companies. Ribera defended the DMA in a recent interview, stating that the EU should not be pressured into altering laws that have already been approved by European lawmakers.

For more information on these topics, visit diplomacy.edu.