X hit with $140M EU fine for breaching content rules
37 comments
·December 5, 2025charcircuit
embedding-shape
> I don't want my X posts being handed over to researchers even if they are technically public.
Then X shouldn't make their business available in the EU, but because X wants EU users, they're participating in a market where they need to follow the law of the market. If you disagree with X's choice of participating in that market, you should vote with your wallet/attention.
> On social media and chat platforms there is an expectation of the posts and chat messages you make to be private due to being in an obscure section of the website
That might be, but the internet unfortunately doesn't work like that, they are public platforms, so the information there is treated as public information, which it is. If you make it invite-only, I understand the expectation of privacy and private conversation, but for platforms with open signup? Don't participate and share stuff you don't want to be public, it's kind of easy.
calvinmorrison
"Then X shouldn't make their business available in the EU"
Right... and maybe next the US won't let Europe have any IP space. It's the internet. A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from..
embedding-shape
> A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from
So if I run a business from a country where cocaine is legal, I should be able to sell to users in the US? Are you sure you thought this through? Seems you're letting your emotions get in the way of your reasoning.
remus
> A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from.
Why is that? I think you can reasonably argue that a user should enjoy the protections offered by law in the place they live.
barbazoo
Would you accept or the opposite situation then? A foreign company operating in and violating US law?
femiagbabiaka
This is pretty much the position of China when it comes to IP law. It's compelling in some senses, but notably the U.S. does not agree.
exe34
it can apply US law in the US, yes. in the EU, it needs to follow EU law.
amarcheschi
The reason of the fine is, as stated by the article: EU regulators said X's DSA violations included the deceptive design of its blue checkmark for verified accounts, the lack of transparency of its advertising repository and its failure to provide researchers access to public data.
I hold back no criticism on free speech issues in eu (ie chat control) when it is correct to do so, but this case doesn't look like it
charcircuit
And it says that the investigation in regards to handle how they handle illegal content (speech they don't like) is still ongoing. So the potential fines over free speech are still upcoming.
pessimizer
> Elon Musk's social media company X was fined 120 million euros ($140 million) by EU tech regulators on Friday for breaching EU online content rules
This is what the article said. [edit, mostly wrong: "You gave the reason that was used for an investigation of TikTok, and I don't know where you got the blue check thing from."]
> I hold back no criticism on free speech issues in eu (ie chat control) when it is correct to do so, but this case doesn't look like it
edit: I got a bad load that cut off the end. What was actually said, however was,
> EU regulators said X's DSA violations included the deceptive design of its blue checkmark for verified accounts, the lack of transparency of its advertising repository and its failure to provide researchers access to public data.
Italics mine. The first line however, is about breaching "online content rules."
zb3
The official reason might be this, but we all know what the REAL reason is. Just like with those "rule of law violations" penalties, where they only issue them if there's a conservative government, otherwise you're free to break the law as you wish (see Poland).
Timon3
This complaint can be valid if a) you're not guilty of the "official reason", or b) competitors are guilty of the same things and are not getting penalized.
Can you show that either is true? Regarding b), there have been many, many articles posted here which show competitors being fined for various rule violations, so concrete examples would be great.
mrtksn
EU should just force X to sell to EU owners or get blocked.
thickoldmen
I don't know anyone who supports this censorship agenda. These obtuse bureaucrats need to get fresh air.
uyzstvqs
cy_hauser
A much better link. The underlying article there explains why they are being fined.
pu_pe
X is likely losing money in the EU at this point, and complying with the rules would also cost them money and/or reputation. Maybe they should consider pulling out.
barbazoo
I’m assuming they’re only losing money in the hard sense, not in the “soft” sense considering the unimaginable wealth that comes from manipulating millions of people.
maelito
One of X's aim is to influence elections. So losing money is obviously not important to them.
perching_aix
> Maybe they should consider pulling out.
I pulled myself out from Twitter instead a while ago, and I can only recommend. And I don't mean this in the "in favor of Bluesky/Mastadon" sense.
There are some types of content that I did lose access to this way, but in retrospect it was worth it. I found that the cost-benefit for it is just not there, not for me at least.
smcl
X is losing money everywhere
delichon
It put a cooperative president in power. What's that worth?
amarcheschi
Maybe they should consider pulling out (from Earth) then
add-sub-mul-div
Think of it as the opposite of something like public transportation, which doesn't need to be profitable because it's a public good.
vkou
Trillionaires don't buy media companies to make money, they do it to push propaganda.
varjag
Musk wants his agitprop vector in Europe. He will pay the fine and attempt to maliciously comply.
arealaccount
It would have been hilarious if they hit X with a $420M fine
embedding-shape
Fortunately for Europeans, politicians and businesses in Europe don't seem to run on the new American "meme vibes" corporate culture. I'm glad we didn't import that, but probably just a question of when...
null
rich_sasha
$1m per character
udev4096
Why is it so low? When will big corps get jailed for their actions?
null
>"I think it's very important to underline that DSA is having nothing to do with censorship,"
Only under the EUs backwards idea that if it makes speech illegal it's not censorship.
>its failure to provide researchers access to public data.
I don't want my X posts being handed over to researchers even if they are technically public. On social media and chat platforms there is an expectation of the posts and chat messages you make to be private due to being in an obscure section of the website. Just look out the outrage over people's privacy that happens every time someone makes a public search engine of everyone's chat messages on a Discord that has an open invitation link. People's idea of privacy does not align with the idea that anything public should be widely spread with others.