The EU is losing two titans of tech regulation, testing its resolve

Two chief architects of the European Union’s sprawling digital rule book are stepping down, creating huge absences that could shape how the bloc enforces its crackdowns against the tech giants.

European Commissioner Thierry Breton, who oversaw sweeping new social media regulations under the Digital Services Act (DSA), said Monday that he was resigning effective immediately.

And last month it was reported that Executive Vice President Margrethe Vestager, the top European Commission antitrust official who ushered in the Digital Markets Act (DMA) competition rules, will be stepping down from her role later this year.

Their departures mark the end of an era for tech regulation in Europe, which has been the global epicenter of efforts to rein in giants like Google, Apple and Microsoft for much of the past decade — in significant part because of Vestager and Breton.

“U. S. tech firms are probably feeling a big sigh of relief,” said Anupam Chander, a professor of law and technology at Georgetown University.

Under Breton, a former French economy minister, the E.U. has pressured tech companies to take a harder line against illegal content such as terrorist propaganda and child abuse material, to be more transparent about how they algorithmically recommend content to users and to mitigate risks posed by disinformation. The E.U. codified many of those efforts with its adoption of the DSA in 2022.

In recent weeks, Breton has drawn global attention for publicly sparring with X owner Elon Musk over his decision to host a live stream on the site with former president Donald Trump. (X CEO Linda Yaccarino celebrated Breton’s exit on Monday as “a good day for free speech.”)

Vestager, meanwhile, a minister in several Danish governments before becoming the face of E.U. competition policy for a decade, developed a reputation as Big Tech’s chief antagonist overseas.

She helped drive major investigations and fines against industry giants and ultimately the adoption of the DMA. The rules target so-called “gatekeepers” that European regulators say have abused their power to squelch rivals.

Breton and Vestager are leaving only months after the EU’s landmark tech regulations came into effect, raising questions about how the rules will be carried out without two of its most vocal proponents leading the body.

Andrea Renda, director of research at the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels, said “both Vestager and Breton will be remembered as proactive, competent E.U. officials” associated with a “rather assertive position towards tech giants.”

But he said they are leaving behind “a huge body of legislation … that awaits full implementation and streamlining in the years to come,” as well as questions about lagging European innovation.

Sandra Wachter, a professor at the Oxford Internet Institute, said the coming years post-Vestager and Breton will show “how effective [the DSA and DMA] are in practice.”

The issue was top of mind for Vestager at a SXSW roundtable with reporters in March, where she described her priorities, simply, as: “implementation, implementation, implementation.”

Now that task will largely be left to another crop of E.U. leaders.

The shift in leadership will test how committed the E.U. is to providing the resources needed to impose its complex new rule book, said David Kaye, a law professor at University of California at Irvine. “You need somebody at the most senior level who’s able to make that happen,” he said.

The pair’s departure could also test the sturdiness of the EU’s posture toward the tech giants, especially after a recent report commissioned by the bloc sharply criticized its approach to regulating the sector.

“One wonders if the Commission is seeking a new direction from the intense digital economy regulatory period that the E.U. has been engaged in,” Georgetown’s Chander said of the report, written by former European Central Bank president Mario Draghi.

From our notebooks

Court looks to NetChoice, older cases in deciding TikTok’s fate

A federal appeals court in Washington said it is eyeing a Supreme Court ruling from the summer, as well as several decades-old cases, for guidance on whether to halt a nationwide ban on TikTok, my colleague Eva Dou reports of the Tech Brief.

The Supreme Court’s July decision in Moody v. NetChoice, which found the First Amendment bears on state efforts to stop social media platforms from removing some political posts, was mentioned several times during Monday’s hearing. The judges said there were parallels but also a significant difference: TikTok’s foreign ownership.

Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan said the “serious” First Amendment concerns raised in that case must be weighed in TikTok’s situation against the national security concerns of Beijing’s sway over its parent company.

The judges revealed that they were also pondering similarities to much older cases, including Lamont v. Postmaster General in 1965, which struck down as unconstitutional a law blocking the delivery of communist propaganda through the mail; and the 1988 case Palestine Information Office v. Shultz, which upheld the State Department’s authority to shut down the office in the interest of curbing international terrorism despite protests that it impinged on free speech.

After Monday’s hearing, a decision in the TikTok case is not expected until December.

U.S. expands sanctions against backers and sellers of Predator spyware

U.S. officials broadened their actions Monday against the people and companies behind Predator spyware, which countries have used against political rivals and journalists and which The Washington Post and media collaborators reported last year has been aimed at members of Congress, my colleague Joseph Menn reports for the Tech Brief.

The Treasury Department announced sanctions against five individuals and one company associated with the Intellexa Consortium, a web of allied companies in multiple countries that have developed or sold Predator to government agencies around the world.

The actions build on two previous rounds of sanctions against two executives and seven companies in the same network. Like its older rival Pegasus, sold by NSO Group, Predator can take secret control of iPhones and Android phones, and watchdog organizations say it has been used in at least 18 countries.

The Post reported this month that many spyware backers evade sanctions by changing corporate names and structures and shifting jurisdictions. American officials have been leading the crackdown, citing national security and global human rights.

They told reporters that founders were increasingly concerned about being sanctioned and that some companies were having difficulty moving money around as financial institutions fear similar repercussions.

Government scanner

TikTok faces skeptical judges in court fight over looming national ban (Drew Harwell and Eva Dou)

Yes, TikTok could still be banned. Here’s what you should know. (Tatum Hunter, Shira Ovide and Heather Kelly)

Inside the industry

Instagram’s latest child safety effort: ‘Teen accounts’ (Naomi Nix and Cristiano Lima-Strong)

Elon Musk Deletes Post Wondering Why No One Was Trying to Assassinate Biden or Harris (Wall Street Journal)

Sam Altman leaves OpenAI board’s safety and security committee (Axios)

Meta bans Russian state media outlet RT for acts of ‘foreign interference’ (Niha Masih)

Intel Confirms $3 Billion Defense Department Chips Act Grant (Bloomberg)

Competition watch

YouTube CEO Says Google Faces Plenty of Ad Tech Competition (New York Times)

Workforce report

Amazon tells staff to return to office five days a week (Danielle Abril)

Data centers are everywhere. What it’s like to work in one. (Danielle Abril)

Trending

Apple improved green bubble chats with iOS 18. But not enough. (Shira Ovide and Geoffrey A. Fowler)

Daybook

• The Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing, “Oversight of AI: Insiders’ Perspectives,” Tuesday at 2 p.m.
• The House Energy and Commerce Committee holds a legislative markup on child online safety and privacy legislation, Wednesday at 10 a.m.
• The Senate Intelligence Committee holds a hearing, “Foreign Threats to Elections in 2024 — Roles and Responsibilities of U.S. Tech Providers,” with executives from Meta, Google and Microsoft, Wednesday at 2:30 a.m.
• The House Energy and Commerce Committee holds a hearing, “Federal Trade Commission Practices: A Discussion on Past Versus Present,” Thursday at 10:30 a.m.
• The Federal Trade Commission holds an open meeting, Thursday at 11 a.m.
• The House Ways and Means Committee holds a hearing, “Protecting American Innovation by Establishing and Enforcing Strong Digital Trade Rules,” Friday at 9 a.m.

Before you log off

That’s all for today — thank you so much for joining us! Make sure to tell others to subscribe to Tech Brief. Get in touch with Cristiano (via email or social media) and Will (via email or social media) for tips, feedback or greetings!