TikTok loses ground in EU gatekeeper challenge as court adviser backs regulators
A legal opinion from Europe's top court is strengthening the European Commission's position in its dispute with TikTok over the platform's status under the Digital Markets Act. The recommendation increases pressure on ByteDance as the case moves toward a final ruling in the coming months on whether TikTok must comply with the bloc's strict gatekeeper obligations.
Highlights
- TikTok lost support in its EU gatekeeper challenge as Advocate General Andrea Biondi recommended the Court of Justice dismiss ByteDance's action.
- The European Commission's designation of TikTok as a Digital Markets Act gatekeeper would subject the company to strict new regulatory obligations in the EU.
- Judges, who follow four out of five Advocate General opinions, are expected to rule in the C-627/24 P ByteDance v Commission case in the coming months.
Court opinion supports Commission's DMA designation
As reported by Reuters, an adviser to the Court of Justice of the European Union on Thursday backs EU regulators in TikTok's challenge to its designation as a gatekeeper under the Digital Markets Act.Andrea Biondi, Advocate General at the court, says the court should dismiss the action brought by ByteDance, TikTok's parent company, against the European Commission's decision to classify the company as a gatekeeper under the rules.
The case is listed as C-627/24 P ByteDance v Commission.
Ruling could shape Big Tech compliance in Europe
Judges are due to rule in the coming months, and they usually follow four out of five such non-binding recommendations.The dispute matters for large technology platforms operating in the European Union because gatekeeper status under the Digital Markets Act carries strict obligations intended to curb market power and regulate platform conduct.
Our earlier coverage of Apple’s trade-secret dispute with OpenAI focused on a California court hearing where a judge indicated he was likely to grant Apple an injunction limiting OpenAI’s use of allegedly misappropriated information. The report outlined how the case could disrupt OpenAI’s consumer hardware plans and intensify pressure around internal controls as both sides traded claims about confidential files and employee moves.
Latest EU Antitrust News
-
Afghanistan
-
Albania
-
Algeria
-
Angola
-
Argentina
-
Armenia
-
Australia
-
Austria
-
Azerbaijan
-
Bahamas
-
Bahrain
-
Bangladesh
-
Belarus
-
Belgium
-
Bolivia
-
Botswana
-
Brazil
-
Brunei
-
Bulgaria
-
Cambodia
-
Cameroon
-
Canada
-
Chile
-
China
-
Colombia
-
Congo
-
Costa Rica
-
Cote d'Ivoire
-
Croatia
-
Cuba
-
Cyprus
-
Czechia
-
DR Congo
-
Denmark
-
Dominican Republic
-
Ecuador
-
Egypt
-
El Salvador
-
Estonia
-
Eswatini
-
Ethiopia
-
Finland
-
France
-
Georgia
-
Germany
-
Ghana
-
Greece
-
Haiti
-
Hong Kong
-
Hungary
-
India
-
Indonesia
-
Iran, Islamic republic
-
Iraq
-
Ireland
-
Israel
-
Italy
-
Jamaica
-
Japan
-
Jordan
-
Kazakhstan
-
Kenya
-
Korea
-
Kuwait
-
Kyrgyzstan
-
Laos
-
Latvia
-
Lebanon
-
Lesotho
-
Libya
-
Lithuania
-
Luxembourg
-
Madagascar
-
Malaysia
-
Malta
-
Mauritius
-
Mexico
-
Moldova
-
Mongolia
-
Montenegro
-
Morocco
-
Mozambique
-
Myanmar
-
Namibia
-
Nepal
-
Netherlands
-
New Zealand
-
Nigeria
-
North Macedonia
-
Norway
-
Oman
-
Pakistan
-
Palestine
-
Panama
-
Papua New Guinea
-
Paraguay
-
Peru
-
Philippines
-
Poland
-
Portugal
-
Puerto Rico
-
Qatar
-
Reunion
-
Romania
-
Rwanda
-
Saudi Arabia
-
Serbia
-
Singapore
-
Slovakia
-
Slovenia
-
Somalia
-
South Africa
-
Spain
-
Sri Lanka
-
Sweden
-
Switzerland
-
Syria
-
Taiwan
-
Tajikistan
-
Tanzania
-
Thailand
-
Trinidad and Tobago
-
Tunisia
-
Turkey
-
UAE
-
Uganda
-
Ukraine
-
United Kingdom
-
United States
-
Uruguay
-
Uzbekistan
-
Venezuela
-
Vietnam
-
Yemen
-
Zambia
-
Zimbabwe
- Forex
- Crypto
