Illegal content, transparency & deceptive design
Notice-and-action, systemic-risk management, the "Blue check" deceptive design, the ad repository, and researcher data access. First-ever DSA formal proceedings.
- Art. 16
- Art. 25(1)
- Art. 34
- Art. 35
- Art. 39
- Art. 40(12)
- Request for information
RFI on the spread of illegal content and disinformation around the Hamas attacks on Israel, and on the crisis-response protocol. Source ↗
- Formal proceedings opened
The first-ever DSA formal proceedings — covering notice-and-action, risk management, deceptive design, ad transparency and data access. Source ↗
- Preliminary findings
First-ever DSA preliminary findings: the Blue-checkmark design deceives users (Art. 25), the ad repository is not searchable/reliable (Art. 39) and researcher data access is obstructed (Art. 40). Source ↗
- Additional investigatory measures
RFI on X’s recommender systems plus a retention order preserving documents on algorithm changes, and a request for access to X’s commercial API. Source ↗
- €120M fine
First DSA non-compliance decision and fine, for the Art. 25(1), 39 and 40(12) breaches. X given 60/90 working days to remedy; further non-compliance can trigger periodic penalty payments. Source ↗
- X appeals to the EU General Court
X challenged the €120M decision (X v Commission) — the first court challenge to a DSA fine. The 90-working-day remedy deadline for the ad repository and data access passed without a public outcome. Source ↗
First DSA non-compliance decision. Confirmed breaches of Art. 25(1) (Blue checkmark), Art. 39 (ad repository) and Art. 40(12) (researcher data access). The illegal-content and information-manipulation (Community Notes) strands remain open.