Elon Musk’s X.com is under scrutiny by the European Union for alleged violations of the Digital Services Act (DSA), potentially resulting in fines of over $200 million. Here are the details:
Violation Allegations:
- Dark Patterns and User Deception: The EU accuses X of using its “blue check” verification system in a misleading manner that does not align with industry standards. The system allegedly allows anyone to obtain a “verified” status, undermining users’ ability to discern authentic accounts and content from deceptive ones. Malicious actors are said to exploit this feature to deceive users.
- Advertising Transparency: X.com is accused of failing to meet transparency requirements regarding advertising practices on its platform. Large online platforms like X are required to provide clear information about how advertisements are managed and displayed to users.
- Data Access for Researchers: The EU claims that X.com did not comply with directives to provide researchers with access to public data through its API, hindering academic and public scrutiny of the platform’s operations.
Legal Proceedings:
- Preliminary Findings: The European Commission has issued a preliminary finding of breach against X.com based on an investigation launched in December 2023.
- Potential Fines: If found guilty, X.com could face fines amounting to 6% of its global annual turnover, which was approximately $3.4 billion in 2023. This could exceed $200 million.
- Right to Defense: Elon Musk and X.com have the opportunity to respond to the allegations and present their defense before any final decisions are made. Musk’s response on his platform, questioning the authenticity of a verified user, sparked additional attention but did not clarify his stance on the allegations.
Conclusion:
The accusations against X.com under the DSA highlight ongoing concerns about transparency, user trust, and data access in digital platforms. As the case progresses, X.com will need to address these allegations effectively to avoid substantial fines and potential supervision by regulatory authorities. The outcome of this case could also set precedents for how large tech platforms navigate regulatory frameworks in the EU.
