Social media platform that has grown in exodus from Elon Musk’s X is accused of not declaring user numbers
  • Pennomi@lemmy.worldEnglish
    266·
    1 month ago

    The commission cannot regulate Bluesky directly as it does not yet reach the threshold of more than 45mn monthly users in the EU to be designated a very large online platform.

    So it’s a nothing burger and they’re not violating shit.

    • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
      231·
      1 month ago

      That’s not correct. The FT has not explained this clearly.

      If an online platform has more than 45 million monthly users (~10% of EU population) then it is classified as a Very Large Online Platform. In that case, the Commission can directly make rules for it.

      If it has fewer users, then it is still regulated by the Digital Services Act (DSA). The DSA claims jurisdiction over all platforms that have users in the EU. Among other things, they need to have a representative in the EU (IIUC). FWIW I’m pretty sure that lemmy is not compliant either.

      DSA: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R2065&qid=1732567528372

      • Pennomi@lemmy.worldEnglish
        11·
        1 month ago

        Lemmy also doesn’t have a single owner. It would be crazy hard to comply if each instance had to have their own representative in the EU.

        Or maybe since most Lemmy instances aren’t corporations it doesn’t matter? I bet only a lawyer could say for sure.

        • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          1 month ago

          Instances that are established in the EU don’t need a representative. Instances outside the EU don’t really need to care. What’s the EU going to do about it? (I am not fully certain if they are in scope, unless they particularly target people in the EU.)

          I doubt the average lawyer would be able to say much. The DSA is not something 99.9% of them will ever encounter. Anyway, it does not matter if the service is run by a corporation or an individual.

        • Vincent@feddit.nlEnglish
          4·
          30 days ago

          Doesn’t really matter if you don’t do business in the EU anyway, and AFAIK, no Lemmy instances are businesses.

          • General_Effort@lemmy.worldEnglish
            2·
            30 days ago

            If you are outside the EU and don’t receive money from inside the EU, then there is no realistic way in which a fine can be collected. IDK if it is possible to use IP bans, and such, against services that don’t comply with the DSA and other such regulation, but that would still not be something a non-commercial instance would need to worry about.

            But many Lemmy instances are inside the EU, and fines can certainly be collected from them.

  • federal reverse@feddit.orgMEnglish
    8·
    1 month ago

    “All platforms in the EU . . . have to have a dedicated page on their website where it says how many users they have in the EU and where they are legally established,” said commission spokesman Thomas Regnier. “This is not the case for Bluesky as of today. This is not followed.”

    I sure hope this is not a platform.

    • Maestro@fedia.io
      21·
      1 month ago

      I don’t think any Lemmy or Mbin instance has more that 45 million monthly active and users. So it doesn’t matter.

      • cabbage@piefed.socialEnglish
        121·
        30 days ago

        And by the time they do, I would strongly agree on regulating them. If you have that many users you need accountability even if you’re not evil.

  • Vincent@feddit.nlEnglish
    2·
    30 days ago

    What’s good to know that generally, in the EU and most European countries, I believe, the goal of regulations is compliance, not punishment. So “finding that an organisation is in breach” of something isn’t necessarily the first step towards punishment (fines or whatever) - often the next and final step is notifying the org and the org making adjustments to comply.