The European Union (EU) Digital Services Act (DSA), which entered into force exactly one year ago, is now fully operational. According to Paulina Tamelytė-Matulevičienė, Advisor at the Legal Department of the Lithuanian Radio and Television Commission (LRTK), this is evidenced by the first fine imposed on the social media platform X for failing to comply with the rules. However, LRTK Chairman Mantas Martišius notes that this is unlikely to mark a breakthrough in the regulation of social networks, as the EU’s influence remains limited.

Tamelytė-Matulevičienė pointed out that the current regulation of platforms is only partially effective. According to her, significant efforts are being made at the EU level to introduce rules governing platform activities. Nevertheless, she notes that the Digital Services Act itself is quite difficult to apply in practice, as the platform environment is changing particularly rapidly. However, the lawyer hopes that the unprecedented fine imposed on platform X will lead to clearer regulatory practice.

“This indicates which actions and forms of non-compliance the EU considers to be violations of the Digital Services Act for which financial sanctions may be imposed. Therefore, when similar violations are identified – such as shortcomings in the advertising archive, misleading ‘blue tick’ verification, restrictions on researchers’ access to data, and similar issues – significant financial sanctions may be imposed on platforms after assessing the degree and nature of the violation and other relevant circumstances,” she said.

The issue of social platform regulation is highly politicised

Martišius points out that issues related to platform regulation often move to a higher international political level, which complicates decision-making.

“The EU’s attempts to regulate, curb, and influence social networking platforms have been ongoing since around 2016. The biggest problem is that all of these social platforms operate in the EU but are managed outside the Union, mostly in the United States. When attempts are made to regulate their activities, the issue becomes political and negotiations are no longer between the platforms and the EU, but between the EU and the United States,” said the LRTK chairman.

Furthermore, according to him, decisions are also complicated by negative public reactions to possible restrictions on social networks.

“It is difficult to imagine life without social platforms. Therefore, the EU’s ability to influence or regulate them is essentially limited. Yes, there are threats of restrictions and fines, but if a social platform were to resist and introduce, for example, restrictions on use, there would be public outrage. There are not many means of pressure available, so the first fine imposed on platform X will probably not be a turning point, but rather an introduction to further EU–US negotiations on regulation, freedom of speech, and related issues,” he said.

The system is based on agreements

According to Tamelytė-Matulevičienė, one of the most important factors for the successful implementation of the Digital Services Act is real and active cooperation between platforms and supervisory authorities.

“Although the obligations of platforms are clearly defined, in practice not all of them are willing to implement them smoothly and on time, often looking for arguments as to why the instructions of authorities should not be followed. Without such cooperation, the ability of authorities to effectively supervise platform activities remains limited,” the lawyer said.

For his part, Martišius noted that dialogue and mutual agreement have so far ensured the successful application of the regulation.

“The Digital Services Act stipulates that platforms should take into account requests from institutions and regulatory authorities. LRTK monitors the information space and, if it identifies misinformation, copyright infringements, circumvention of sanctions, or similar issues, we contact the platforms with a request to remove the content. So far, this mechanism has worked well and the platforms have responded willingly,” he said.

“However, under the current rules, the final decision rests with the platforms. In other words, requests from state institutions and regulators are not binding orders. This raises the question of what could be done if platforms were unwilling to cooperate. At this point, probably not much,” he added.

ELTA reminds that the European Commission has imposed a large fine for violations of the Digital Services Act for the first time. The social platform X (formerly Twitter) has been fined €120 million for failing to comply with transparency and design rules.

The Commission found that the paid “blue tick” verification system is misleading, the advertising database lacks mandatory information, and there is insufficient access to public data for researchers, as required by the DSA.

X must now submit and implement a compliance plan, failing which additional sanctions or even access restrictions may be imposed.

This fine is the first measure of this magnitude under the new EU regulation, which aims to increase the accountability of large digital platforms operating in the European Union.