WebProNews

Tag: EU Commission

  • Germany Pushes Back Against EU Client-Side Scanning Plans

    Germany Pushes Back Against EU Client-Side Scanning Plans

    The EU Commission wants to roll out client-side scanning on consumers’ devices, but Germany is pushing back against the plan.

    Client-side scanning is being touted by some companies and regulators as a way to “preserve” end-to-end encryption by scanning for illegal content on a person’s device. If such content is found, authorities will be notified. The idea is that since all the scanning occurs on a user’s device, communications between devices can remain end-to-end encrypted.

    Germany, however, isn’t buying that argument and, at a recent hearing of the German Parliament’s Digital Committee, made clear it doesn’t agree with the EU’s proposal. Germany is basing its opinion on the many computer and security experts who have testified that the EU’s proposal will do far more harm than good.

    “The draft regulation basically misses the goal of countering child abuse representations,” emphasized the Computer scientist and spokeswoman for the Chaos Computer Club, Elina Eickstädt (via computer translation). “The design is based on a gross overestimation of capabilities of technologies “, especially with regard to the detection of unknown material.

    Client-side scanning also represents “an unprecedented surveillance infrastructure,“ added Eickstädt. She pointed out that even an error rate of one percent will lead to billions of false reports, warning that the technology could eventually become “censorship tools of equal value.”

    Read more: EU Proposes Most Privacy-Invasive Measure Yet to Tackle Child Abuse

    Interestingly, even the Head of the Central and Contact Point Cybercrime North Rhine-Westphalia, Chief Prosecutor Markus Hartmann, said the EU’s proposal goes too far. Instead, he said existing law enforcement agencies should be shored up to better utilize server-side scanning abilities and traditional investigative techniques, rather than the more invasive client-side scanning.

    The EU Commission’s proposal is certainly one of the most privacy-invasive measures being pursued by a democracy. Even by the EU’s own admission, a client-side scanning “process would be the most intrusive one for users.”

    The EU’s proposal is currently being negotiated, giving Germany a chance to make its case and have the client-side scanning clause dropped. Otherwise, should the bill become law, many experts believe it will never survive its first court challenge.

    “Child protection is not served if the regulation later fails before the European Court of Justice,” said Felix Reda from the Society for Freedom Rights. “The damage to the privacy of all people would be immense “, he added. “The tamper-free surveillance violates the essence of the right to privacy and cannot therefore be justified by any fundamental rights assessment.”

    Should the EU’s proposal go unchallenged, as Harvard cryptography professor Matthew Green says, the bloc will go down in history as creating “the most sophisticated mass surveillance machinery ever deployed outside of China and the USSR.”

  • EU Poised to Warn Broadcom Over VMware Deal

    EU Poised to Warn Broadcom Over VMware Deal

    The European Union is poised to issue a warning to Broadcom over its proposed purchase of VMware for $61 billion.

    Broadcom announced a deal to acquire VMware for $61 billion in May 2022. The deal came as a shock to many, including many VMware employees who were not happy with the prospect of joining Broadcom.

    Regulators have expressed concerns about the deal, with the EU Commission opening an investigation in December, after UK regulators took a similar step in November.

    According to Reuters, the EU is now preparing to issue a warning to Broadcom over the proposed deal. This will give the two companies an opportunity to address concerns and offer potential remedies, although the outlet’s sources say Broadcom has no intention of preemptively offering remedies before seeing the charges in the warning.

  • EU Considers Making Big Tech Pay For Infrastructure Upgrades

    EU Considers Making Big Tech Pay For Infrastructure Upgrades

    The EU Commission is considering a proposal that would see tech companies charged for network infrastructure upgrades.

    The Commission is trying to address challenges likely to arise as the technological landscape continues to evolve. Cloud computing, edge computing, and AI are just a few of the transformative technologies that could have a profound impact on infrastructure requirements.

    The Commission outlined its concerns in a survey:

    The aim is to gather views on the changing technological and market landscape and how it may affect the sector for electronic communications. It also touches upon the types of infrastructure and amount of investments that Europe needs to lead the digital transformation in the coming years.

    Digital markets and in particular connectivity markets are facing transformative technological and market developments. These include cloud data storage, the transition to edge computing, the usability of the Metaverse, artificial intelligence, virtual reality and more. Moreover, such developments are not isolated from the challenging geopolitical and the broader economic situation.

    These various technologies will require “massive investments” in infrastructure:

    New generations of mobile communications will require massive investments in fibre and densification of antennas. New performance will enable critical use cases and the connection of objects. These developments will likely have a significant impact on the business model of providers of electronic communications networks (“ECNs”), as well as of other actors in the value chain. In light of this, it is important to broadly reflect on how to secure a resilient connectivity architecture based on a sustainable business model able to support our digital future in the EU.

    To be clear, the Commission has not publicly endorsed any possibility, but TechCrunch says it is leaning toward a telco proposal that would see Big Tech companies charged for the upgrades. In particular, the EU is looking at those companies that are responsible for the majority of online traffic, such as Google, Meta, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and Netflix.

  • EU Commission Bans TikTok On Staff Phones

    EU Commission Bans TikTok On Staff Phones

    The EU Commission has followed the US Congress, banning TikTok on all government-owned devices.

    TikTok has increasingly been in the crosshairs of regulators on both sides of the Atlantic over privacy concerns and the company’s link to Beijing. The issues have taken a sharp turn for the worse after the company admitted to surveiling journalists.

    According to BBC News, the EU Commission has banned the app from government-owned devices to “protect data and increase cybersecurity.”

    “The measure aims to protect the Commission against cybersecurity threats and actions which may be exploited for cyberattacks against the corporate environment of the commission,” EU spokeswoman Sonya Gospodinova said.

    In the meantime, legislation has been introduced in the US that would ban the app entirely, and the EU has warned TikTok that a similar measure could be taken in the EU if the company fails to respect user privacy.

  • Adobe’s Figma Purchase May Be In Jeopardy

    Adobe’s Figma Purchase May Be In Jeopardy

    Adobe’s $20 billion Figma deal may be in trouble, with EU Commission weighing whether to launch an antitrust probe.

    Adobe announced in September that it had struck a deal with Figma to acquire the startup for $20 billion. Figma has been gaining in popularity, providing a web-based competitor to Adobe’s tools at a fraction of the cost. Almost immediately, the deal was met with angst and anger from users, many of whom were using the product specifically because they did not want, or could not afford, to use Adobe’s products.

    According to Bloomberg, the European Commission has received a number of requests from member states to probe the deal. The number of requests evidently fell below the threshold that would normally trigger a probe, but the Commission did acknowledge that the deal could “significantly affect competition.”

    The Commission will ask Adobe to notify the transaction, meaning the companies will need EU clearance to proceed.

    “We look forward to working constructively with the European Commission to address its questions and bring the review to a timely close,” a Figma spokesperson told Bloomberg.

  • EU Poised to Give Microsoft Antitrust Warning Over Activision Deal

    EU Poised to Give Microsoft Antitrust Warning Over Activision Deal

    Microsoft’s troubles with its Activision Blizzard deal are about to get worse, with the EU poised to give the company an antitrust warning.

    According to Reuters, the European Commission is preparing to serve Microsoft an antitrust warning over concerns about its effort to purchase Activision. Microsoft announced plans to purchase the game studio in January 2022, a deal worth $68.7 billion.

    Regulators on both sides of the Atlantic have expressed concerns that Microsoft could use Activision to further its position in the PC gaming market, as well as the broader PC market. The UK has launched a challenge to the deal and the FTC has sued to block it.

    Microsoft has evidently been open to remedies in an effort to win EU approval, but Reuters reports that the EU is not open to discussing remedies until after it delivers its charge sheet in the coming weeks.

    In the meantime, Microsoft remains hopeful it can satisfy concerns and move forward with the deal.

    “We’re continuing to work with the European Commission to address any marketplace concerns,” the company says. “Our goal is to bring more games to more people, and this deal will further that goal.”

  • Amazon Agrees to Major Business Changes in the EU to Head Off Probe

    Amazon Agrees to Major Business Changes in the EU to Head Off Probe

    Amazon has reached an agreement with the EU to make major changes to its business in exchange for heading off antitrust probes.

    Amazon was under fire for dealing unfairly with third-party sellers, preferring its own retail business over those of competitors, as well as for using its sellers’ non-public data to fine-tune its own services and gain an advantage.

    The EU Commission outlined its concerns in a statement:

    In July 2019, the Commission opened a formal investigation into Amazon’s use of non-public data of its marketplace sellers. On 10 November 2020, the Commission adopted a Statement of Objections in which it preliminarily found Amazon dominant on the French and German markets, for the provision of online marketplace services to third-party sellers. It also found that that Amazon’s reliance on marketplace sellers’ non-public business data to calibrate its retail decisions, distorted fair competition on its platform and prevented effective competition.

    In parallel, on 10 November 2020, the Commission opened a second investigation to assess whether the criteria that Amazon sets to select the winner of the Buy Box and to enable sellers to offer products under its Prime Programme, lead to preferential treatment of Amazon’s retail business or of the sellers that use Amazon’s logistics and delivery services.

    As part of the agreement, Amazon will no longer use non-public data from its sellers to improve its own products. The company will also make offers and products from competing sellers equally visible in its “Buy Box.” The terms of the deal will be enforced for seven years, but will only be in effect within the EU.

    “Today’s decision sets new rules for how Amazon operates its business in Europe,” said Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President in charge of competition policy. “Amazon can no longer abuse its dual role and will have to change several business practices. They cover the use of data, the selection of sellers in the Buy Box and the conditions of access to the Amazon Prime Programme. Competing independent retailers and carriers as well as consumers will benefit from these changes opening up new opportunities and choice.

  • EU Steps Up Its Investigation Into Microsoft’s Activision Deal

    EU Steps Up Its Investigation Into Microsoft’s Activision Deal

    Microsoft’s purchase of Activision Blizzard has hit another snag, with the EU opening an “in-depth investigation.”

    Microsoft announced at the beginning of the year that it was purchasing Activision Blizzard for $68.7 billion, making it one of the biggest deals in tech history. Almost immediately, regulators on both sides of the Atlantic expressed concern over the potential impact of Microsoft — the maker of the Xbox gaming console — owning the publisher of some of the world’s most popular gaming titles.

    Although the EU has already been investigating the deal, The Verge is reporting that it is moving to an “in-depth investigation.” The EU Commission plans to carry out its investigation over a period of 90 work days, meaning the deal could be delayed until March 23.

    The Commission said it was “concerned that the proposed acquisition may reduce competition in the markets for the distribution of console” and PC titles. The concerns don’t stop there, however, with the Commission afraid that Microsoft owning Activision could even help it shut out rivals in the broader PC market.

    “The Commission is concerned that Microsoft may reduce the ability of rival providers of PC operating systems to compete with Microsoft’s operating system Windows, by combining Activision Blizzard’s games and Microsoft’s distribution of games via cloud game streaming to Windows,” the Commission said in a statement. “This would discourage users to buy non-Windows PCs.”

    As recently as September, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said he was “very, very confident” the deal would be approved. Only time will tell if that sentiment proves true.

  • AWS Exec Takes Microsoft to Task for Cloud Licensing Terms

    AWS Exec Takes Microsoft to Task for Cloud Licensing Terms

    AWS’ SVP of Sales and Marketing is calling out Microsoft for its cloud licensing terms, despite the latter company’s recent changes.

    Microsoft was slapped with an EU antitrust complaint, with smaller rivals claiming the company uses its desktop and office suite dominance to unfairly compete in the cloud market. The complaint alleges that it costs more for companies to use a third-party cloud provider, rather than bundling Windows and Office with Microsoft Azure. Microsoft has since vowed to change its licensing terms, but AWS’ Matt Garman says it’s not enough:

    Customers and policy makers around the world increasingly see MSFT’s recent licensing rhetoric as a troubling admission of the same anti-competitive tactics that many companies have been raising with them for years, but went unheeded until they were put before the European Commission.

    Garman goes to say that Microsoft is not really interested in doing what’s right for its customers and that the company continues to engage in discriminatory practices:

    MSFT’s answer is not to do what’s right for customers and fix their policy so all customers can run MSFT’s software on the cloud provider they choose; but rather, under the pretext of supporting European technology needs, MSFT proposes to select cloud providers about whom it is less competitively concerned and allow MSFT software to run only on those providers. This is not fairness in licensing and is not what customers want. We continue to hear from customers around the world that MSFT’s discriminatory licensing practices are costing them millions of dollars and the freedom to work with whom they wish.

    While it’s not uncommon for tech companies and executives to take shots at one another, Garman’s words are particularly pointed. It’s no secret that Microsoft Azure is a growing threat to AWS’ position in the market. As a result, it’s hard to tell whether Garman’s statements are borne out of genuine concern for customers or a larger concern over Azure’s growth in the market.

  • Intel Wants the EU to Pay It $624 Million in Interest Over Overturned Fine

    Intel Wants the EU to Pay It $624 Million in Interest Over Overturned Fine

    Intel may have won its case to overturn a €1 billion fine antitrust fine in the EU, but the chipmaker is now pressing for interest to be paid.

    In January 2022, the EU’s second-highest court overturned a €1 billion fine imposed on Intel in 2009. The EU Commission accused Intel of trying to use rebates and other incentives to block manufacturers from using chips from rival AMD. Intel was ordered to pay the fine before it was reversed 12 years later.

    Intel now wants the Commission to pay it $624 million in interest, according to Reuters. The EU Court did address interest last year, saying the Commission would need to pay default interest for fines that have been overturned and reimbursed. What’s more, the court said late payments on interest would incur further interest.

    It’s been a rough few days or the EU’s antitrust regulators. Last week the same court overturned a $1 billion fine against Qualcomm, criticizing regulators’ handling of the case.

    As we wrote in our coverage of that story, Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager will likely need to be more careful in how she and her regulators go after tech companies and build cases against them.

  • Intel Wins Massive EU Antitrust Case, Overturning €1 Billion Fine

    Intel Wins Massive EU Antitrust Case, Overturning €1 Billion Fine

    Intel has scored a major legal victory in the EU, overturning a 12 year-old verdict that resulted in a €1 billion fine.

    The case stemmed from Intel’s practice of offering rebates to computer manufacturers if they primarily used its chips, rather than rival AMD’s. The EU Commission fined Intel €1 billion for what it perceived as Intel abusing its dominant market position.

    According to The Irish Times, the General Court annulled the decision, criticizing the EU Commission’s decision.

    “The (European) Commission’s analysis is incomplete and does not make it possible to establish to the requisite legal standard that the rebates at issue were capable of having, or likely to have, anticompetitive effects,” judges said.

    Interestingly, the General Court — the EU’s second-highest — had previously upheld the decision in 2014. The EU’s highest court, the EU Court of Justice, told the General Court to reconsider Intel’s appeal in 2017, leading to this latest decision.

    It’s unclear what will happen next, with the Commission saying it will consider the decision and what, if any, steps it will take next.

  • US Carriers Deny Blocking iCloud Private Relay — Mostly

    US Carriers Deny Blocking iCloud Private Relay — Mostly

    Following reports that T-Mobile was blocking Apple’s iCloud Private Relay, all three major US carriers have denied actively blocking it — for the most part.

    iCloud Private Relay is a feature introduced as a beta in iOS 15 and macOS Monterey. The feature is similar to a VPN, and hides a person’s internet traffic. Some users reported that T-Mobile was starting to block the feature, something that 9to5Mac confirmed.

    According to The Verge, all three carriers are trying to reassure users they are not intentionally or actively blocking Private Relay. Verizon and AT&T, in particular, said they are not blocking the feature in any way.

    Things are a bit more complicated with T-Mobile. The vast majority of customers will not experience any issues, but accounts that are using T-Mobile’s Family Controls won’t be able to use Private Relay.

    “Customers who chose plans and features with content filtering (e.g. parent controls) do not have access to the iCloud Private Relay to allow these services to work as designed. All other customers have no restrictions,” T-Mobile’s spokesperson The Verge.

    That explanation is inline with Apple’s own description of Private Relay:

    Networks that require the ability to audit traffic or perform network-based filtering will block access to Private Relay.

    T-Mobile also told The Verge that it discovered an issue with Private Relay that could cause it to not work, and informed Apple so they could fix it.

    “Overnight our team identified that in the 15.2 iOS release, some device settings default to the feature being toggled off. We have shared this with Apple. This is not specific to T-Mobile.” 

    A Potential Future Showdown

    Hopefully all three carriers maintain their current stance. As The Verge points out, European carriers — including T-Mobile — have been campaigning against Private Relay, even asking the EU Commission to block the feature. The carriers claim it is “cutting off other networks and servers from accessing vital network data and metadata, including those operators in charge of the connectivity.”

    There’s two issues with the carriers’ actions:

    First, should the carriers succeed in convincing the EU Commission to block the feature, it’s a reasonable assumption that VPNs will likely be next on the chopping block, given that Private Relay offers many of the same benefits.

    Successfully blocking Private Relay — let alone if the carriers target VPNs next — will significantly undermine many users’ privacy and security online.

    Second, if the EU Commission gives in and blocks Private Relay, it will essentially confirm the right of companies to mine at least some datafrom paying customers, regardless of whether the customer agrees to it.

    As we have written about before, it’s one thing for the provider of a free service to mine data from their customers. Since they’re providing a service for free, profiting from the customer’s data is often the accepted trade-off.

    On the other hand, when a customer is paying for a service, there should be an expectation that’s where the transaction ends — the company provides a service in exchange for a fair amount of money, end of story.

    If the carriers are successful in their goals, it will set a dangerous precedent that will erode privacy for everyone.

  • EU Regulators Open Probe of Nvidia’s Arm Acquisition

    EU Regulators Open Probe of Nvidia’s Arm Acquisition

    Casting further doubt on Nvidia’s attempt to purchase Arm Holdings, EU regulators have opened a formal investigation.

    Nvidia announced in September 2020 that it had reached a deal to acquire Arm Holdings. Arm is one of the leading semiconductor design firms, licensing its designs to companies for use in their products. Some of the biggest names in tech, including Apple, Google, Qualcomm, Samsung and Nvidia, all use Arm’s designs.

    The deal drew immediate scrutiny, with critics concerned Nvidia would undermine Arm’s traditional way of doing business. The company has always been strictly neutral, licensing its designs to any company willing to pay. Critics were concerned Nvidia might withhold Arm’s best designs for itself, giving it a competitive advantage.

    The UK, where Arm is based, has already launched probes and investigations over competitive and national security concerns, and signaled it may seek to block the deal. According to Reuters, the EU is also getting in on the action, launching their own probe. The EU is evidently not satisfied with the concessions Nvidia has been willing to make for the deal to move forward.

    “Whilst Arm and Nvidia do not directly compete, Arm’s IP is an important input in products competing with those of Nvidia, for example in datacentres, automotive and in Internet of Things,” EU competition chief Margrethe Vestager said.

    “Our analysis shows that the acquisition of Arm by Nvidia could lead to restricted or degraded access to Arm’s IP, with distortive effects in many markets where semiconductors are used,” she continued.

    The Commission will decide by March 15 whether the deal may move forward.

  • US Officials Warn EU Against Targeting American Companies

    US Officials Warn EU Against Targeting American Companies

    US officials are warning the EU not to single out American companies with “protectionist” tech policies.

    The EU has a much higher standard for consumer protections and privacy, policies that have put it on a collision course with numerous US companies. In addition, some specific EU countries, like Ireland and the Netherlands, have worked out favorable tax deals with US companies. The EU has repeatedly tried to end those deals, although courts have so far ruled in favor of keeping them in place.

    US officials are now warning the EU not to go too far in targeting US companies, according to the Financial Times, via Ars Technica. Of particular concern were comments by Andreas Schwab, a member of the European Parliament.

    “We are particularly concerned about recent comments by the European Parliament rapporteur for the Digital Markets Act, Andreas Schwab, who suggested the DMA should unquestionably target only the five biggest US firms,” said an email, sent by National Security Council staff to the EU delegation, seen by the Financial Times.

    The email continued: “Comments and approaches such as this make regulatory co-operation between the US and Europe extremely difficult and send a message that the [European] Commission is not interested in engaging with the United States in good faith to address these common challenges in a way that serves our shared interests.

    “Protectionist measures could disadvantage European citizens and hold back innovation in member-state economies. Such policies will also hinder our ability to work together to harmonize our regulatory systems,” the email said.

    US and EU officials have stressed the importance of working together to improve regulation of Big Tech. Not surprisingly, an NSC official told the Financial Times the segments the outlet saw did not reflect the full context. Either way, it’s clear fair scrutiny of American, as well as non-American, companies will likely be a critical negotiating point in any future agreements.

  • EU Loses Case to Force Amazon to Pay Back Taxes

    EU Loses Case to Force Amazon to Pay Back Taxes

    The European Union has lost a high-profile case in which it was trying to force Amazon to pay $300 million in back taxes.

    It’s not uncommon for corporations to make tax deals with individual EU states. Apple and Google have both made deals with Ireland, and Amazon had a deal with Luxembourg. In many cases, the deals are lucrative for individual states, making them eager to work with foreign companies.

    The EU isn’t always pleased with those deals, however, and has tried to end them in the past. The EU lost a court case trying to stop a deal between Apple and Ireland, and now it has lost a similar case over Amazon and Luxembourg.

    According to The Houston Chronicle, the EU’s executive branch had ordered Amazon to pay back taxes in the amount of $300 million. After challenging the ruling, the EU’s General Court overturned the European Commission’s ruling, saying it didn’t prove “to the requisite legal standard that there was an undue reduction of the tax burden of a European subsidiary of the Amazon group.”

    The decision is a big win for Amazon, as well as other foreign companies doing business within the EU.

  • EU May Enorce Smartphone Replaceable Batteries

    EU May Enorce Smartphone Replaceable Batteries

    The European Commission is considering a proposal that would force smartphone manufacturers to use easily replaceable batteries.

    One of the primary goals of the proposed legislation is to help reduce e-waste by giving users the ability to replace an aging battery and continue using the phone. As ZDNet highlights, how the EU would go about enforcing it is unknown. Evidently, despite the EU trying to enforce a uniform charging port standard, there are no plans to take a similar approach with batteries. Different manufacturers, shapes, sizes and more all play into how batteries are designed.

    Although replaceable batteries used to be quite common in cell phones, the industry has changed dramatically since then. Phones have become larger, while at the same time slimmer. Smartphones are used hours more per day, and for a wider variety of tasks, than old-style flip phones.

    Companies often are accused of sealing up their phone cases and using non-replaceable batteries to improve profits by making it difficult to replace the battery and extend the life of the device. In at least some cases, however, there are practical issues. Having a sealed case helps keep dust out and makes it easier to waterproof the phone. It can also be easier to put a larger battery in a sealed phone.

    These factors will likely cause manufacturers to push back against the EU’s proposal. Whether they will be successful or not, remains to be seen.

  • EU Commission Switching to Signal Messaging App

    EU Commission Switching to Signal Messaging App

    In an effort to improve its cybersecurity, the EU Commission is encouraging its staff to switch to the Signal messaging app.

    In the world of messaging, Signal is considered the king of security. It features end-to-end encryption that is widely believed to be the best in the business. It’s so good, in fact, that its protocol serves as the basis of the more popular WhatsApp. Unlike WhatsApp, however, Signal is also open-source, ensuring a level of transparency that other apps can’t match.

    Signal has recently been in the news as it works to become a more mainstream alternative to more well-known competitors. A big part of that was an investment by WhatsApp cofounder Brian Acton of $50 million two years ago. Acton left Facebook over disagreements about WhatsApp’s privacy once Facebook acquires his creation. By throwing his weight—and money—behind Signal, Acton obviously sees the app as the successor to WhatsApp, and the best option for individuals who want to keep their communications secure.


    The EU Commission evidently agrees, as it wants its staff to switch to the messaging app to help avoid the kind of embarrassing leaks it has experienced recently, according to Politico. The move will likely cause turmoil in the greater debate about end-to-end encryption, as governments around the world are pushing tech companies to create backdoors for government access. Mathematicians, cryptographers, scientists, tech leaders and even some lawmakers have all said such a quest is foolhardy, dangerous and impossible to achieve without fundamentally weakening encryption and opening up innocent individuals to having their data compromised.

    The EU seemingly endorsing the single, most secure end-to-end encryption platform on the planet will go a long way toward making the case against backdoors or weakening of the very encryption the EU is counting on.

    Image Credit: Signal (Instagram @signal_app)