EU is considering new rules for cloud and AI under the Digital Markets Act

Skye Jacobs

Posts: 1,987   +58
Staff
Looking ahead: The European Union is turning its regulatory attention to a new layer of the tech stack: cloud infrastructure and AI systems increasingly controlled by a small group of dominant players. In a report released this week, the European Commission said it plans to expand the scope of the Digital Markets Act to include cloud computing and artificial intelligence, building on what it views as early success in curbing Big Tech's influence over digital markets.

The DMA, which took effect in May 2023, currently applies to companies including Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Booking.com, ByteDance, Meta, and Microsoft. These firms are designated as "gatekeepers," a status that comes with rules intended to prevent them from using their scale to block competition.

So far, regulators say the law has made it easier for users to move their data between services and has improved interoperability across operating systems.

"The DMA was designed to be future-proof and adapt to emerging challenges, for example in AI and cloud," European Union antitrust chief Teresa Ribera said in a statement.

Regulators are now testing that approach. The Commission is investigating whether Amazon and Microsoft's cloud businesses should also be classified as gatekeepers, a move that would bring core infrastructure services under the same regulatory framework as app stores and search engines.

Competition concerns are moving deeper into the technical foundations of digital services. Cloud platforms are no longer just storage and compute providers; they now bundle databases, developer tools, and increasingly, integrated AI models. That vertical integration can make it harder for customers to switch providers or mix and match services across vendors.

Regulators are also assessing how AI services fit within the DMA. One possibility under review is whether certain AI systems should be designated as "virtual assistant core platform services," subjecting them to stricter rules on interoperability and data access.

The Commission said its goal is to make both cloud and AI markets "fairer and more contestable," though it has not yet outlined specific remedies.

Notably, the EU is holding back in other areas. Despite pressure from some companies to require interoperability among major social platforms, regulators said they do not see sufficient demand to justify such a step.

For now, the broader structure of the DMA will remain intact. The Commission said it does not plan to revise how companies are designated as gatekeepers or change the core obligations they must follow, arguing that the existing framework is still "fit for purpose."

The response from industry has been mixed. Apple pushed back on the report, arguing that the DMA's requirements could weaken user privacy and security. The company said the changes could expose users to more harmful content through alternative distribution channels, disrupt the user experience, increase the risk of sensitive data being shared with untrusted third parties, and delay access to new features available in other markets.

Consumer advocates are taking the opposite view. The pan-European group BEUC has called on regulators to step up enforcement, particularly as competition issues shift toward AI and cloud services.

As the Commission moves into this next phase, applying those rules to cloud and AI will be more complex, given how deeply those systems are embedded in the software stack. Unlike app stores or browsers, cloud and AI platforms are tightly integrated across the software ecosystem, making it harder to draw clear lines around what constitutes fair competition.

Permalink to story:

 
US innovates, China replicates... Europe regulates?
The subtitle perfectly sums it up.
I'd remove the question mark at the end.

It's unexplainable why the EU, which practically does not exist on the AI / cloud map, is so obsessed with regulating stuff it can't produce - and under the current extremely hostile to innovation conditions, can't even dream to ever produce?
Isn't it better to focus on creating the right conditions for the businesses to innovate, and leave the regulation for later, after the European businesses eventually start innovating again?
 
We wish the U.S would also start regulating in order to stop the massive corporate corruption currently happening based on everything A.I thanks to the Trump administration purposely turning a blind eye on questionable activities, from illegal gambling, massive job losses, market manipulation, among many more.
 
The subtitle perfectly sums it up.
I'd remove the question mark at the end.

It's unexplainable why the EU, which practically does not exist on the AI / cloud map, is so obsessed with regulating stuff it can't produce - and under the current extremely hostile to innovation conditions, can't even dream to ever produce?
Isn't it better to focus on creating the right conditions for the businesses to innovate, and leave the regulation for later, after the European businesses eventually start innovating again?
They can produce it and EU companies do, it's just that it's cheaper for an EU company to build a Data center in the US die to tax incentives and energy costs. If it wasn't for the china ban, companies would be building them their since energy is cheaper and regulations are looser
 
They can produce it and EU companies do, it's just that it's cheaper for an EU company to build a Data center in the US die to tax incentives and energy costs. If it wasn't for the china ban, companies would be building them their since energy is cheaper and regulations are looser
Well if it's cheaper for an EU company to build a Data center in the US due to tax incentives, then there's something terribly wrong with the EU, right?
That's exactly what I was trying to say.
 
Well if it's cheaper for an EU company to build a Data center in the US due to tax incentives, then there's something terribly wrong with the EU, right?
That's exactly what I was trying to say.
Oh, I thought you were asking about leveraging debt for investment. But, yeah, the whole system is f****d. The thing is that the US is signing multi year tax deals for people to build data centers here. It's not that the EU doesn't have AI data centers, they do, just not at the scale we are building them in the US. Again, the US is subsidizing energy costs where in the EU, the cost of electricity costs what it actually costs to produce. Something people are starting to realize in the US with rising energy costs near data centers is what the actual cost of energy is. It's not just burning coal, it's maintaining the power lines to deliver it. I'm actually very pro building data centers if it means they have to pay to upgrade the energy and water infrastructure where it's built. If OpenAI has to pay to upgrade the grid and water systems where they build instead of making consumers foot the bill, do it.
 
Despite pressure from some companies to require interoperability among major social platforms, regulators said they do not see sufficient demand to justify such a step.

Meanwhile American officials line up in a row and bend over the moment big tech comes knocking. I'm not for most EU "protections" which actually reduce security and privacy (they are the same thing), but this at least portrays some semblance of a spine.
 
Well if it's cheaper for an EU company to build a Data center in the US due to tax incentives, then there's something terribly wrong with the EU, right?
That's exactly what I was trying to say.

Maybe they're just looking to put the brakes on the race to the bottom. Despite structural advantages like ample space and energy a fair few US companies still seem to end up leaving their own employees barely able to cover the cost of living, with poor benefits, and a lot of people perpetually a few paychecks or an injury away from personal bankruptcy. When the Chinese do the same to us we call that stealing our jobs.

Somehow US companies still seem to want to offer their services in Europe because there's paying customers there, but at the same time they can't stop complaining about having to play by Europe's rules. So let's leave already. I bet the only thing Europeans would really miss is Google. The others are easily replaced.
 
I'm not sure if the tagline is supposed to mock Europe and show US superiority? Better some regulation than no regulation by lobbysts, American way. Eventually American innovation will suffocate, if startups will die-out under the rule of the jungle imposed by trillion dollar leaders buying themselves Washington's lawmakers.
 
Maybe they're just looking to put the brakes on the race to the bottom. Despite structural advantages like ample space and energy a fair few US companies still seem to end up leaving their own employees barely able to cover the cost of living, with poor benefits, and a lot of people perpetually a few paychecks or an injury away from personal bankruptcy. When the Chinese do the same to us we call that stealing our jobs.

Somehow US companies still seem to want to offer their services in Europe because there's paying customers there, but at the same time they can't stop complaining about having to play by Europe's rules. So let's leave already. I bet the only thing Europeans would really miss is Google. The others are easily replaced.
What brakes, what race ..
The EU dropped off all the races long ago.
 
EU has no money so they will extort money to keep themselves competitive and secured. They call themselves a Union but many States are fragmented.
 
EU has no money so they will extort money to keep themselves competitive and secured. They call themselves a Union but many States are fragmented.

'Extort', really? That word seems more appropriate for what we're doing ourselves with tariffs right now. Also, the way we're currently holding the world's energy supply hostage. And how this administration is blatantly picking winners and losers among our own states, businesses, universities and whatever else it can plunder.
 
Over-regulation is a funny thing when you see where money are coming. In EU taxes from rich and large companies are used by government to help people to get education and health under control, making even a low payment jobs sufficient to have a normal life. In US, it is poor and (quickly degrading) middles who pay taxes which are used by government to help rich and corporations to make more money.

EU doesn't overregulate. It simply leveling the playing field. And if this is such an issue for large companies, ask yourself, why they don't leave? Answer is simple: they making a shitload of money even with those regulations, while still the people in EU benefits from taxes. What you should ask (apart of why US citizens see not tax money from the richest ones) is why working class in US is endlessly milked by them while still taking a uber to an emergency instead of ambulance... my take is that US got used to the slavery a bit too much and idea of ordinary people not having to worry about everyday expenses is unsettling to the rich as that is their modern age whipping technique.
 
Over-regulation is a funny thing when you see where money are coming. In EU taxes from rich and large companies are used by government to help people ...
Regulation and taxation / budget redistribution have absolutely nothing in common. You can have higher taxes without over-regulation and lower taxes with over-regulation.
Actually the corporate taxes in the US and the EU are not too different, but the levels of hyper-over-regulation in the EU are .. mamma mia .. simply insane.

You may ask yourself, why no major technological company appeared in the EU in the last 2 decades. Why innovation stopped so abruptly?
 
The subtitle perfectly sums it up.
I'd remove the question mark at the end.

It's unexplainable why the EU, which practically does not exist on the AI / cloud map, is so obsessed with regulating stuff it can't produce - and under the current extremely hostile to innovation conditions, can't even dream to ever produce?
Isn't it better to focus on creating the right conditions for the businesses to innovate, and leave the regulation for later, after the European businesses eventually start innovating again?
I think it has more to do with their digital sovereignty push than it does stifling/encouraging innovation. They want less reliance on American firms, and to do that they need to be able to migrate away from them more easily.
 
I think it has more to do with their digital sovereignty push than it does stifling/encouraging innovation. They want less reliance on American firms, and to do that they need to be able to migrate away from them more easily.
You can migrate away from something to another thing. How do you migrate from something to nothing?
Europe has no viable alternative to anything, it practically does not exist in the AI realm, the "sovereignty push" is a purely bureaucratic endeavor. How many significant European tech companies emerged in the last two decades? That's right, exactly ZERO.
 
You can migrate away from something to another thing. How do you migrate from something to nothing?
Europe has no viable alternative to anything, it practically does not exist in the AI realm, the "sovereignty push" is a purely bureaucratic endeavor. How many significant European tech companies emerged in the last two decades? That's right, exactly ZERO.
I'm not claiming that their policy is wise, but I do think that's their motivation. Their thinking (I believe) is that self-reliance will create the pressure for local innovation to occur, similar to how China is growing an advanced technological capability.
 
Back