Elon Musk: Always A Douche

[Josquius]

My guess is Elmo fired all the compliance people so he couldn't produce evidence of compliance with the DSA even if he wanted to.

Also the DSA fine is up to 6% of global turnover. Enjoy!

Ah but what's 6% of a negative number.
Negative fine baby!

[crazy canuck]

My guess is Elmo fired all the compliance people so he couldn't produce evidence of compliance with the DSA even if he wanted to.

Also the DSA fine is up to 6% of global turnover. Enjoy!

Ah but what's 6% of a negative number.
Negative fine baby!

I don't think it is net profit, but revenue.

[Zoupa]

It is.

I'm gonna enjoy the man-baby going up against EU bureaucracy.

Hint: it will not go well for the man-baby.

[Sheilbh]

I suspect the EU will not use Twitter to serve notice on regulatory infractions. 

Breton posted it on Twitter:

Thierry Breton
@ThierryBreton
Following the terrorist attacks by Hamas against 🇮🇱, we have indications of X/Twitter being used to disseminate illegal content & disinformation in the EU.

Urgent letter to @elonmusk on #DSA obligations ⤵️

Musk replied:

Elon Musk
@elonmusk
Our policy is that everything is open source and transparent, an approach that I know the EU supports.

Please list the violations you allude to on 𝕏, so that that the public can see them.

Merci beaucoup.

That's the chain before the screenshot above and Breton's further response on this issue is:

Thierry Breton
@ThierryBreton
We have received the reply by @X to our letter raising concerns about the spread of illegal content and disinformation related to the Hamas terrorist attack against Israel.

The #DSA enforcement team will analyse the reply and decide on next steps.

I'm not entirely sure it needed to start publicly, especially without any specific allegations of infringement that is, instead, heavy on insinuation.

I would say in my area of European regulation that whole approach is very, very unusual (but largely enforced by member state regulators not the Commission directly). As you say it's normally lengthy legal letters identifying specific issues, or requests for information/intent to investigate with deadlines/a timetable. Not a general, public letter on a social media platform @ing the owner. There might be a press release but it will be short and purely informative to avoid risk to any decision - a lot like this where they are actually launching an investigation:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_23_4953

I think that first letter posted on Twitter may well end up being part of a legal challenge, if the Commission does enforce.

[Hamilcar]

Breton has his own confrontational style.

[Syt]

I'm not entirely sure it needed to start publicly, especially without any specific allegations of infringement that is, instead, heavy on insinuation.

I would say in my area of European regulation that whole approach is very, very unusual (but largely enforced by member state regulators not the Commission directly). As you say it's normally lengthy legal letters identifying specific issues, or requests for information/intent to investigate with deadlines/a timetable. Not a general, public letter on a social media platform @ing the owner. There might be a press release but it will be short and purely informative to avoid risk to any decision - a lot like this where they are actually launching an investigation:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_23_4953

I think that first letter posted on Twitter may well end up being part of a legal challenge, if the Commission does enforce.

I'm guessing the "my team will follow up shortly" will be the actual "meat" of the request. Posting this publicly is a stunt, yes, but he probably also wanted to make sure Elon paid attention.

Though I can't help roll my eyes a bit at his response.

Breton: "Hey, you may have stuff on your platform that is illegal under EU law."
Musk: "Oh yeah? What exactly? Please post here!" (i.e. add more links/attention to the content you think is problematic and shouldn't be shown)

[Sheilbh]

I don't disagree on the response I think Musk is very annoying. Although I don't think it's unreasonable for Musk to aks for specifics.

Breton has form on messages to Musk - eg from this time last year:

Thierry Breton
@ThierryBreton
👋 @elonmusk
 

In Europe, the bird will fly by our 🇪🇺 rules.

#DSA

Or the video after their meeting: https://x.com/ThierryBreton/status/1523773895974612992?s=20

Cynically I think it's grandstanding because Twitter and Musk are more news-y than Meta (which on literally every issue I think is 10 times more shady than anyone else ), TikTok or Google. I think Breton wants to advertise this new law and regulatory power in his portfolio which makes sense but may get in the way of actually enforcing against Twitter.

You do not see Margrethe Vestager, for example, publishing open letters at companies she thinks are breaking competition law - you see her announcing findings with big fines after lengthy investigations. (And I think within Brussels this may be a little bit of dick swinging of Breton as Internal Market Commissioner with new powers, precisely because Vestager as Competition Commissioner has been so effective )

[crazy canuck]

I am going to push back a bit on your analysis Sheilbh - enforcement is not the only job of a regulator in her role.  Public education is also a significant part of her job.  You often get regulators who are woefully inadequate at that role  And often way too cautious about what they are prepared to say publicly with that hat on.

It is important to consider the context of the company to which she is addressing her comments.  These are mainly aimed at the public so that everyone who is currently is filing complaints with her office regarding what is being allowed by X will know she is on the job.

I find her approach to be a breath of fresh air. 

[Sheilbh]

Maybe - that's fair. I think it is also particularly important with European law because a lot of what the EU does is quite technical, so output legitimacy is really important when it can be attached to something newsworthy or that people care about. See also the big fuss about forcing Apple to change their charger. My general view is that effective enforcement is the best PR for a regulator - again why I think Vestager at Competition has been so good.

Breton's role is not much of a public facing regulator though - broadly it's more like the Commission's role on competition law. Technically I don't think individuals have a right to complain to the Commission - but member states don't actually need to nominate the authority for taking complaints in each country until February, so the Commission may be taking complaints direct. The Commission has very broad rights to investigate directly which its exercising but there's no duty to even consider or respond to public complaints.

I think that's possibly because of the way EU data protection law has slightly been the dog that didn't bark in terms of actual enforcement which may also be why Breton is being so public. There's been some big fines but less than I think many expected, particularly because enforcement is broadly in the hands of member state regulators and some have been captured so for this law the Commission has their own powers and they are broad (obviously worth pointing out that member states also have very broad powers with real risks to civil liberties).

[Syt]

Musk is also floating the idea of charging $1 a year to new xwitter users - "to fight bots".

Also, report claims that Twitter traffic is down 14% YoY a year after Musk's takeover, and monthly active users down 17%.

https://techcrunch.com/2023/10/17/one-year-post-acquisition-x-traffic-and-monthly-active-users-are-in-decline-report-claims/

Also also:

https://www.reuters.com/technology/musk-considers-removing-x-platform-europe-over-eu-law-insider-2023-10-18/

Musk considers removing X platform from Europe over EU law - Insider

Oct 18 (Reuters) - Elon Musk, owner of social media platform X, is considering removing the service formerly called Twitter from Europe in response to a new internet platform regulation in the region, news site Insider reported on Wednesday.

The billionaire has discussed removing the app's availability in the region, or blocking users in the European Union from accessing it, a person familiar with the company told the publication.

The European Union in August adopted the Digital Services Act (DSA), which sets forth rules for preventing the spread of harmful content, banning or limiting certain user-targeting practices, and sharing some internal data with regulators and associated researchers, among other things.

X did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

(On that note, Meta's Threads is still not available in the EU because they want to make sure that if they launch they follow DSA and data protection rules - Meta got burned on that before - though not sure if they're seriously pusuing this at the moment.)

[Syt]

[Josquius]

That reply on the voter suppression. Two counts of .
How can a guy so seemingly dumb be so successful?

[Sheilbh]

(On that note, Meta's Threads is still not available in the EU because they want to make sure that if they launch they follow DSA and data protection rules - Meta got burned on that before - though not sure if they're seriously pusuing this at the moment.)

It's not the DSA or data protection that's holding up Threads, it's the Digital Markets Act which is part of the digital package the EU's been working on. There are big challenges for Meta (as I say - my default assumptions is that whatever you think Twitter or Google are doing dodgily with data, Meta are ten times worse ) on DP especially. But it's working its way through the courts and process very, very slowly - in my view there is regulatory capture in Ireland and the Irish regulator is going to bat for Meta on that stuff. But broadly speaking Meta would say their big platforms - Facebook, Insta, WhatsApp - comply with those EU laws. It would be wild (and expensive) to build a new product that didn't. Similarly Threads launched in the UK which still has more or less exactly the same DP rules as the EU and has just passed legislation very similar to the DSA - but nothing like the DMA (although the competition regulator is consulting on it, in part because I think it's unclear if it needs new legislation or if they already have the relevant powers).

Basically the DSA is about online harms and the platforms' responsibilities in relation to content; the DMA is more about their market power as "gatekeepers" in the digital world. I have concerns about the DSA, but generally think the DMA is really good not least because traditional approaches to competition struggle with big digital companies, particularly social media.

The particular thing from my understanding that's an issue for Meta from the DMA is that it basically bans "self-preferencing" where you favour other of your own products. I think there is a little bit of a lack of clarity on this. But the impact on Threads is the reason it launched well in other markets was that it was a new product that you must use your Instagram account to create - that is arguably self-preferencing. It's also what allowed Google or Amazon to easily launch new, distinct products is you simply use your account from one into another. To an extent I sympathise with the companies that it generally is easier to integrate a product with something you've already got, on the other hand the point from the DMA and how to approach competition online is that it's an abuse of a dominant position.

They could launch it tomorrow if you had to create a new account or sign-up with your email, rather than it being basically a new product from your Instagram account.

[Josquius]

It's not the DSA or data protection that's holding up Threads, it's the Digital Markets Act which is part of the digital package the EU's been working on. There are big challenges for Meta (as I say - my default assumptions is that whatever you think Twitter or Google are doing dodgily with data, Meta are ten times worse )

Particularly fucked up is the device profiles they make to track you even if you  aren't logged into FB.

I guess the UK launch is because getting a fine in the UK isn't so bad as getting a fine EU-wide....Plus they probably gamble our government will not be particularly eager to enforce a law carried over from the EU, and they're incompetent.

[Grey Fox]

That reply on the voter suppression. Two counts of .
How can a guy so seemingly dumb be so successful?

He's highly charismatic, especially to venture capitalists.