Amazon to call on EU judges for online platform rules exemption
Amazon will on Thursday try to convince EU judges that it should not have to comply with the strictest requirements under the bloc's online platform rules – the Digital Services Act (DSA) – because it does not pose the systemic risks that the rules intend to combat.
The DSA entered into force in 2023 and obliges platforms to prevent illegal activities online as well as to counter the spread of disinformation.
Amazon is one of the 25 Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) that were designed by the European Commission because they have more than 45 million users per month. To them, the strictest rules apply.
Amazon challenged that decision before the court and argues that its marketplace activities do not fall in the scope of the rules.
A spokesperson told Euronews ahead of the hearing in the EU's highest court in Luxembourg on Thursday that the DSA was designed to address systemic risks brought by those companies "with advertising as their primary revenue and that distribute speech and information".
The Amazon Store, as an online marketplace, "does not pose any such systemic risks; it only sells goods, and it doesn't disseminate or amplify information, views or opinions," the spokesperson added.
The court last year already dismissed interim measures requested by Amazon in a bid to avoid full implementation until the challenge had been decided.
The Big Tech company said that making their advertising public, as the DSA requires, would give away trade secrets to their competitors.
However, the ruling said that EU interests prevail over Amazon's material interests and stressed the importance of the timely implementation of the law.
The Amazon spokesperson said that despite it contesting the VLOP designation, the company is 'committed to protecting customers from illegal products and content".
Consumer group BEUC, which will intervene in the court hearing on the side of the Commission, said in a statement that illegal products have 'regularly' been found on sale on online marketplaces, including Amazon.
Agustín Reyna, BEUC's director general, said that 'it is crucial that the DSA applies in full to Amazon and consumers are protected from any illegal practices once and for all".
The Commission has opened several probes into breaches of the DSA, including into TikTok, X, Facebook, Instagram and AliExpress since the rules came into force. None of the probes, including the one against Temu on suspicion of the sale of illegal products, have been wrapped up.
Besides Amazon, German fashion website Zalando also challenged the Commission designation as a VLOP.
Zalando said in a court hearing in March that the way the EU executive calculates the user numbers to designate VLOPs can be different from company to company.
It also claims that its 'hybrid business model' with a retail business and a partner business does not fall within the scope of the DSA.
If the court sides with Zalando, this could mean a breakthrough for other platforms with similar business models, as well as those that also appealed their designation including Amazon, and porn websites Pornhub and Xvideos.
Rulings in both the Amazon and Zalando case are expected at a later time.
Four of the world's biggest artificial intelligence (AI) companies saw the indirect carbon emissions of their work grow by over 150 percent in the last three years, according to a report from a United Nations agency for digital technolgoies.
The International Telecommunications Union (ITU) tracked the emissions, energy use, and climate commitments of 200 leading digital companies between 2020 and 2023 using public databases.
The report found that Amazon, Microsoft, Google's parent company Alphabet, and Meta have seen a rise in emissions that is either produced or purchased by the companies because of "expanding data infrastructure and energy use".
Indirect emissions are those that come from purchased electricity, heat, steam, or electricity use, like in data centres, telecommunication networks, or office buildings.
Amazon saw the highest emissions increase at over 182 per cent in 2023 compared to 2020, followed by Microsoft at 155 per cent, Meta at 145 per cent, and Alphabet at 138 per cent, according to the report.
The consumption of data centres, which power the AI models that these companies are working on, also rose 12 percent year over year from 2017 to 2023, which is four times faster than global energy growth.
The report "underscores the urgent need to manage AI's environmental impact," the ITU said in a statement.
Euronews Next reached out to the relevant technology companies regarding this report but did not receive an immediate reply.
The report also found that half the assessed companies in their report had committed to reaching net-zero by at least 2050 if not earlier.
Despite these actions, the report found that overall emissions still rose meaning that net-zero targets "have not yet translated into real-world reductions".
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Irish government rejects motion to stop sale of Israeli bonds
The Irish government on Wednesday defeated a cross-party motion that called on it to stop the Central Bank of Ireland from facilitating the sale of Israeli bonds. The motion, presented by the Social Democrats and supported by Sinn Féin, Labour, and People Before Profit, was intended to block what many refer to as 'Israeli war bonds'. The instruments provide economic support to Israel while it conducts military operations in Gaza, and Ireland's Central Bank currently approves the sale of these bonds in EU markets. Bonds issued by non-EU countries must be approved by the financial regulator in one member state before they can be sold within the single market. The bill failed with 85 votes against and 71 in favour, upholding the government's position. Several TDs, Irish members of parliament, argued that Ireland should not be involved in financial instruments that fund destruction in Gaza. The Central Bank estimated that Israel has raised between €100mn and €130mn from their sale. Taoiseach Micheál Martin nonetheless rejected claims that the Irish government is complicit in genocide by allowing the facilitation of the bond sales. Despite publicly acknowledging the severity of Israel's attacks in Gaza, he maintained that Ireland must oppose the military action within legal and diplomatic channels. As such, the government argued that it cannot legally direct the Central Bank due to its independence under Irish and EU law. When the same objection arose last month in response to a similar motion from Sinn Féin, party leader Mary Lou McDonald argued: 'We have over 20 pages of independent, robust legal opinion clearly stating that the bill is compliant with Irish law, European law and international law.' As per the EU's Prospectus Regulation, non-EU countries like Israel must meet disclosure and legal standards to issue bonds in the bloc. If those standards are met, the Central Bank doesn't have the authority to reject bond applications. 'The Central Bank cannot decide to impose sanctions for breaches or alleged breaches of international law. It is for international bodies such as the UN or the EU to determine how to respond to breaches or alleged breaches of international law,' said Central Bank Governor Gabriel Makhlouf. He added that the Genocide Convention applies to the Irish State, not regulatory bodies like the Central Bank. The reason why the Irish Central Bank is at the core of this issue — despite Ireland being one of the EU countries that has been the most vocally pro-Palestine — is Brexit. When the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union in 2016, Israel chose Ireland to be the home member state to approve its bonds. Prior to 2021, this responsibility fell to the UK. The current prospectus for Israeli bonds is set to expire in September, but Central Bank officials believe that Israeli authorities will likely initiate the renewal process several weeks beforehand. In the absence of new EU sanctions or changes to existing legislation, the Central Bank will remain legally bound to approve the bond prospectus, regardless of the political fallout. Meanwhile, protesters have been gathering for months outside the seat of the parliament, Leinster House, and the Central Bank, demanding that the government block Israeli bond sales. Britain's economic recovery suffered a setback in April, with gross domestic product (GDP) shrinking by 0.3% on a monthly basis, marking the steepest contraction since October 2023, according to data released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on Thursday. The contraction, which exceeded market expectations of a 0.1% fall, has renewed concerns over the UK economy's resilience and intensified pressure on both Downing Street and the Bank of England (BoE)'s policy stance. The April downturn followed a modest 0.2% expansion in March and comes amid a broader backdrop of weakening labour market data and fading consumer momentum. The services sector, which accounts for around 80% of UK economic output, was the primary drag in April, declining by 0.4%. Within services, the professional, scientific and technical activities subsector posted a significant fall of 2.4%. This contraction was driven mainly by a 10.2% plunge in legal activities, attributed in part to the impact of changes to Stamp Duty Land Tax thresholds in England and Northern Ireland. The tax change prompted homebuyers to bring forward purchases to March, resulting in a sharp drop in related services, such as conveyancing and estate agency work, in April. Advertising and market research also contributed negatively to GDP, with output down 3.4%, while growth in scientific research and development (up 6.7%) provided a partial offset. The wholesale and retail trade and repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles subsector also weighed on GDP, declining by 1.2% in April after a 0.9% expansion in March. Production output fell by 0.6% in April, with manufacturing production sliding 0.9% — adding to a 0.8% fall in the previous month. Overall industrial production contracted by 0.6%, coming in weaker than the 0.5% decline expected by analysts. Despite a rebound in construction output, which rose 0.9% month-on-month, it was not enough to counterbalance the broader economic dip. The downturn in GDP comes on the heels of deteriorating labour market data released earlier this week. The number of payrolled employees fell by 109,000 in May, the seventh consecutive monthly decline and the sharpest drop since May 2020. The total stood at 30.2 million, a 0.4% monthly fall. The unemployment rate ticked up to 4.6% in the three months to April, in line with expectations, while wage growth softened. Regular pay excluding bonuses increased by 5.2% year-on-year — the slowest pace in seven months and below the 5.4% forecast. Despite the mounting economic headwinds, the BoE is widely expected to leave interest rates unchanged at 4.25% at its upcoming meeting next week. However, traders have increased their bets on a rate cut in August, anticipating a 0.25 percentage point reduction as the economy shows further signs of cooling. Overall, money markets are currently pricing two interest rate cuts of cumulative 50 basis points by the BoE this year. Sterling came under pressure following the GDP release, with the euro rising to 0.85 pounds — the highest level in over a month during morning trading. UK government bond yields extended their weekly declines. The yield on the two-year gilt fell to 3.90%, the lowest since early May, while the ten-year yield slipped to 4.53%. Equity markets, however, remained broadly resilient. The FTSE 100 held steady around 8,860 points, just shy of Wednesday's all-time high of 8,885. Among the notable movers, Halma plc surged over 8% on the back of strong corporate results. BP also gained 1.8%, buoyed by higher oil prices following the announcement of a trade agreement between the United States and China. On the downside, Intermediate Capital Group and EasyJet dropped 4.1% and 2.6%, respectively.
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Italy not liable for Libyan coastguard actions in migrant boat sinking
Judges at the European Court of Human Rights ruled on Thursday that Italy can't be held liable for the actions of Libya's coastguard, rejecting a case brought by a group of migrants rescued from the Mediterranean Sea in a fatal boat sinking in 2017. The court in Strasbourg declared the case inadmissible, finding Italy didn't have "effective control" of the expanse of waters off the coast of Tripoli where the small ship carrying around 150 people sank. Twenty people died in the sinking and around 45 survivors said they were taken to Tajura Detention Centre in Tripoli where they were beaten and abused. The judges found that the captain and crew of the Libyan vessel Ras Jadir had acted independently when they answered a distress signal in the early morning hours on 6 November 2017. Since 2017, Italy has supplied Libya with funding, vessels and training as part of an agreement to slow the numbers of migrants crossing the Mediterranean. However, the judges found that this support didn't prove that "Italy had taken over Libya's public-authority powers." A group of migrants was rescued by the humanitarian organisation Sea Watch and were taken to Italy. A ruling in favour of the 14 survivors who filed the complaint at the ECHR could have undermined international agreements made by several EU countries with Libya, Turkey and others to prevent migrants from coming to European shores. The ECHR handles complaints against the 46 member states of the Council of Europe. The intergovernmental organisation isn't an EU institution and was set up after World War II to promote peace and democracy. Libya isn't a member of the Council of Europe, so the court has no jurisdiction over the country's actions. Three right-wing political groups at the European Parliament are attempting for a second time to establish an investigative inquiry committee into NGO financing by the European Commission, as Transparency International alleges an MEP-orchestrated smear campaign against civil society and is launching a complaint about leaks. German newspaper Welt Am Sonntag claimed last week that the EU executive had allegedly secretly paid environmental NGOs up to €700,000 to promote the bloc's climate policy. The Commission denied the allegations of secret payments and a spokesperson told Euronews that the executive exercises a high degree of transparency when it comes to providing funding to NGOs. "The latest revelations published by the German press about murky ties between the European Commission and environmental NGOs make the establishment of a parliamentary committee of inquiry into the so-called 'Green Gate' scandal ever more urgent," European Conservatives and Reformists MEP Carlo Fidanza said in a press release, adding: "This committee, which has been requested by the ECR Group and backed by 200 MEPs from various political families, is essential." Hungarian Patriots MEP Csaba Dömötör told Euronews he believes more transparency is needed in relation to NGO contracts with the European Commission. "We see that they finance a blindly ideologically driven agenda from taxpayers' money, for which the price and the burden will be paid by taxpayers," Dömötör said, adding: "The Commission says those contracts are not secret. We will see, as we will launch targeted information requests to know the content of those lobbying contracts. The European Commission will have its chance to open up and to prove that the democratic values that they request from member states are also valid for themselves." The Welt allegations first surfaced in February, and in April a parliamentary committee voted down a raft of amendments from right-wing lawmakers seeking to incorporate sharp criticism of EU funding for non-governmental organisations into the discharge of the bloc's 2023 budget. As well as rejecting a joint proposal by Fidesz and France's Rassemblement National to condemn an 'enormous EU-NGO propaganda complex', the committee at that time also rejected a slew of amendments tabled by conservative European People's Party (EPP) lawmaker Monika Hohlmeier. Among these was a call for the EU Court of Auditors (ECA) to conduct a probe specifically into the LIFE Programme, the bloc's funding instrument for environmental projects on the ground, a small portion of which supports campaign groups through operating grants. The Conference of the Presidents at the European Parliament will now decide on the establishment of the committee next week in Strasbourg. Another two right-wing groups, Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations, also lined up in support of the initiative. Rene Aust, chair of ESN, told Euronews the group will support any inquiry into the misuse of public funds. "The Commission is paying activists to shape public opinion – this is not neutral governance, but orchestrated democracy," Aust said. The position of the European People's Party group is not clear-cut, since not all MEPs share Hohlmeier's position. Meanwhile, Transparency International EU director Nick Aiossa told Euronews that the claims of NGO's shadow-lobbying for the Commission have already been debunked. "These are already debunked stories that were circulated in February," said Aiossa, adding: "I simply don't understand why the German press would jump on this, unless, of course, it has a more political agenda behind it from the people who are leaking the contracts." He said that Commission funding of civil society in order to participate in public debate is a good thing, and that ample transparency measures already exist. Back in April, Transparency International stood up against the idea of an inquiry committee in an open letter. "These coordinated attacks that we've seen from this House over the last six months have three very clear objectives. They're meant to discredit NGOs. They're meant to distract NGOs to try and counter these false narratives in the press but ultimately, unfortunately, the ultimate objective is to defund NGOs. And we are about to see this play out in the new budget negotiations that are going to take place over the next several years," Aiossa added. He said that a small circle of right-wing MEPs is responsible for leaking sensitive data to the press, and that Transparency would be filing a legal complaint on the issue. "We've had a handful of MEPs have access to a limited amount of confidential documents that they are using to leak to journalists as part of a smear campaign against NGOs. There are rules in place in how these documents must be handled because they are confidential, and there's no accountability in this House on these leaks. And so I intend to submit a formal complaint to both the Commission as well as the president of the Parliament." At the heart of the latest media revelations on EU funding for environmental NGOs are the LIFE operating grants. These are part of the EU's LIFE programme, a €5.4 billion budget (2021–2027) aimed at financing projects related to green innovation, circular economy, energy efficiency, nature conservation, and pollution reduction. Around €15.6 million of this is allocated to environmental NGOs via operating grants and under this scheme, individual organisations may receive up to €700,000 annually. Grants are awarded through open calls with clear eligibility criteria and NGOs are evaluated not by the Commission directly but by agencies such as, in the case of LIFE , the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA). Advocacy through lobbying is permitted but not required or directed under the grants. Each grant includes the disclaimer that 'views and opinions expressed' by NGOs 'do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union'. Grant conditions are public, and there is no requirement that applicants align their objectives with Commission interests to receive funding. In short: NGOs retain full autonomy over how they use the money, within legal and contractual boundaries. They are subject to transparency rules, must uphold EU values, and are routinely audited. If they fail to implement their work programmes, funding can be withdrawn. While much of the oversight relies on self-reporting – one of the main pitfalls of the system – the Commission is enhancing its risk-based verification following advice from the European Court of Auditors. In April 2025, the EU auditors labelled the Commission's funding process as 'opaque' and warned of potential reputational risks. However, it found no evidence during a year-long probe of any wrongdoing by either NGOs or European Commission officials. As a result, the Commission last year issued new guidance to prevent EU funding from being used for direct lobbying of EU institutions following these concerns. With additional reporting by Gerardo Fortuna
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
Battle over NGO financing heats up again in Brussels
Three right-wing political groups at the European Parliament are attempting for a second time to establish an investigative inquiry committee into NGO financing by the European Commission, as Transparency International alleges an MEP-orchestrated smear campaign against civil society and is launching a complaint about leaks. German newspaper Welt Am Sonntag claimed last week that the EU executive had allegedly secretly paid environmental NGOs up to €700,000 to promote the bloc's climate policy. The Commission denied the allegationsof secret payments and a spokesperson told Euronews that the executive exercises a high degree of transparency when it comes to providing funding to NGOs. "The latest revelations published by the German press about murky ties between the European Commission and environmental NGOs make the establishment of a parliamentary committee of inquiry into the so-called 'Green Gate' scandal ever more urgent," European Conservatives and Reformists MEP Carlo Fidanza said in a press release, adding: "This committee, which has been requested by the ECR Group and backed by 200 MEPs from various political families, is essential." Hungarian Patriots MEP Csaba Dömötör told Euronews he believes more transparency is needed in relation to NGO contracts with the European Commission. "We see that they finance a blindly ideologically driven agenda from taxpayers' money, for which the price and the burden will be paid by taxpayers," Dömötör said, adding: "The Commission says those contracts are not secret. We will see, as we will launch targeted information requests to know the content of those lobbying contracts. The European Commission will have its chance to open up and to prove that the democratic values that they request from member states are also valid for themselves." The Welt allegations first surfaced in February, and in April a parliamentary committee voted down a raft of amendments from right-wing lawmakers seeking to incorporate sharp criticism of EU funding for non-governmental organisations into the discharge of the bloc's 2023 budget. As well as rejecting a joint proposal by Fidesz and France's Rassemblement National to condemn an 'enormous EU-NGO propaganda complex', the committee at that time also rejected a slew of amendments tabled by conservative European People's Party (EPP) lawmaker Monika Hohlmeier. Among these was a call for the EU Court of Auditors (ECA) to conduct a probe specifically into the LIFE Programme, the bloc's funding instrument for environmental projects on the ground, a small portion of which supports campaign groups through operating grants. The Conference of the Presidents at the European Parliament will now decide on the establishment of the committee next week in Strasbourg. Another two right-wing groups, Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations, also lined up in support of the initiative. A source from ESN told Euronews, the group will support any inquiry into the misuse of public funds. "The Commission is paying activists to shape public opinion – this is not neutral governance, but orchestrated democracy." The position of the European People's Party group is not clear-cut, since not all MEPs share Hohlmeier's position. Meanwhile, Transparency International EU director Nick Aiossa told Euronews that the claims of NGO's shadow-lobbying for the Commission have already been debunked. "These are already debunked stories that were circulated in February," said Aiossa, adding: "I simply don't understand why the German press would jump on this, unless, of course, it has a more political agenda behind it from the people who are leaking the contracts." He said that Commission funding of civil society in order to participate in public debate is a good thing, and that ample transparency measures already exist. Back in April, Transparency International stood up against the idea of an inquiry committee in an open letter. "These coordinated attacks that we've seen from this House over the last six months have three very clear objectives. They're meant to discredit NGOs. They're meant to distract NGOs to try and counter these false narratives in the press but ultimately, unfortunately, the ultimate objective is to defund NGOs. And we are about to see this play out in the new budget negotiations that are going to take place over the next several years," Aiossa added. He said that a small circle of right-wing MEPs is responsible for leaking sensitive data to the press, and that Transparency would be filing a legal complaint on the issue. "We've had a handful of MEPs have access to a limited amount of confidential documents that they are using to leak to journalists as part of a smear campaign against NGOs. There are rules in place in how these documents must be handled because they are confidential, and there's no accountability in this House on these leaks. And so I intend to submit a formal complaint to both the Commission as well as the president of the Parliament." At the heart of the latest media revelations on EU funding for environmental NGOs are the LIFE operating grants. These are part of the EU's LIFE programme, a €5.4 billion budget (2021–2027) aimed at financing projects related to green innovation, circular economy, energy efficiency, nature conservation, and pollution reduction. Around €15.6 million of this is allocated to environmental NGOs via operating grants and under this scheme, individual organisations may receive up to €700,000 annually. Grants are awarded through open calls with clear eligibility criteria and NGOs are evaluated not by the Commission directly but by agencies such as, in the case of LIFE , the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA). Advocacy through lobbying is permitted but not required or directed under the grants. Each grant includes the disclaimer that 'views and opinions expressed' by NGOs 'do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union'. Grant conditions are public, and there is no requirement that applicants align their objectives with Commission interests to receive funding. In short: NGOs retain full autonomy over how they use the money, within legal and contractual boundaries. They are subject to transparency rules, must uphold EU values, and are routinely audited. If they fail to implement their work programmes, funding can be withdrawn. While much of the oversight relies on self-reporting – one of the main pitfalls of the system – the Commission is enhancing its risk-based verification following advice from the European Court of Auditors. In April 2025, the EU auditors labelled the Commission's funding process as 'opaque' and warned of potential reputational risks. However, it found no evidence during a year-long probe of any wrongdoing by either NGOs or European Commission officials. As a result, the Commission last year issued new guidance to prevent EU funding from being used for direct lobbying of EU institutions following these concerns. With additional reporting by Gerardo Fortuna German BSH Domestic Appliances group, which owns the Siemens and Bosch brands, has announced the forthcoming closure of a factory in Esquíroz in the north of Spain. More than 650 local jobs are likely to be lost, and production could be relocated to Poland or Turkey. "The situation is really very worrying. This was a company that had proved to be sustainable, a company that had a product that provided services to the rest of Europe and also to Spain, because 80% of the products that came out of this company were then marketed in Spain," Spanish MEP Estrella Galán said. "And now the company has decided to close because of relocation," she added. This is not an isolated case. Relocations are also under way at Audi, Volkswagen and ArcelorMittal. Some MEPs would like the European Parliament to take action to combat deindustrialisation and support the re-industrialisation of Europe, at a time when geopolitical uncertainties are undermining businesses. "We have political instability, we have high energy prices, we have economic uncertainty, we have Donald Trump's tariff war," Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, another Spanish MEP for Renew Europe, told Euronews. "In this case, we have a lack of strategic autonomy. These companies are looking for lower labour costs, they are looking for access to raw materials", Agirregoitia Martínez explained. She recommends simplifying the regulatory and tax framework to support production, innovation and competitiveness in Europe. For her part, Galán is calling for the 25-year-old European directive on collective redundancies to be updated to bring it into line with the "new realities of the labour market". "Within the European Union, we cannot compete between states on the basis of the wage levels that exist in one member state or another," she told Euronews. "It is therefore necessary to reform this directive on collective redundancies and prevent social dumping from being a threat to all workers in the European Union", she adds. Between 2018 and 2020, 72% of French companies that relocated did so in Europe, according to the French national statistics institute (INSEE).
